July 2012Vol. 13, No. 6Print issueSpotlight on Dependency and Juvenile Courts

The National Resource Center for In-Home Services (NRC In-Home) recently released new resources for child welfare professionals who work with lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered, and questioning (LGBTQ) youth. The NRC In-Home hosted a webinar in May titled "Building Support to Serve Families of LGBTQ Youth." The webinar, which is now posted on the NRC's website, coincides with the NRC's publication of In-Home Services for Families of LGBTQ Youth.

In April 2011, the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) released an Information Memorandum concerning the LGBTQ population in foster care. The NRC's resources echo data from the Information Memorandum about LGBTQ youth being overrepresented in the population served by the child welfare system. While it's difficult to know exactly how many LGBTQ youth are in out-of-home care, research suggests they are disproportionately represented in foster care and among the population of runaway and homeless youth. One study of three Midwestern States found that more than 23 percent of female and more than 10 percent of male respondents reported a sexual orientation other than heterosexual. Like other runaway or homeless youth, this population is considered to be at high risk for negative outcomes including unemployment, teen pregnancy, interaction with the juvenile justice system, low educational attainment, and more.

The NRC's publication In-Home Services for Families of LGBTQ Youth provides background information on this vulnerable population and on the impact of familial rejection—which is often the cause of their involvement with the child welfare system or their runaway or homeless status. Additionally, the publication explains the critical need for in-home services for LGBTQ youth and provides examples of research-based, family-focused interventions and promising practice models. 

In-Home Services for Families of LGBTQ Youth, by Diane E. Elze, is available on the NRC's website:

http://nrcinhome.socialwork.uiowa.edu/resources/documents/LGBTissuebriefwithpractice.pdf (837 KB)

Materials from the webinar, available on the NRC's website, include the following:

• PowerPoint presentation slides
• Webcast presentation
• Family Acceptance Project Overall Best Practices Flyer
• Family Acceptance Project Resource List
• LGBTQ Glossary
• Transgender-Related Terminology Handout

The webinar materials are available here: 

http://www.nrcinhome.socialwork.uiowa.edu/events/archived.shtml  

The Quality Improvement Center on Differential Response (QIC-DR) released a summary of the Tribal Symposium on Differential Response held in August and September 2011 that brought together representatives from seven Tribes, various government agencies, and other national nonprofit organizations to share information on differential response (DR). DR, sometimes called alternative response, refers to the use of a tailored response for families reported for child maltreatment and is most often used when there is a determination of low risk or when the family might not otherwise qualify for services.

The Tribal Symposium offered Tribes, policymakers, and other stakeholders the opportunity to share information about DR, lessons learned about implementing and practicing DR in Indian Country, and discuss elements of successful implementation. The report provides background information on each Tribe's culture, child protective services information, implementation activities and, when possible, data collection. The following Tribes attended and presented at the meetings:

• The Chippewa Cree Tribe of the Rocky Boy’s Reservation, MT
• The Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, OR
• Crow Agency, Bureau of Indian Affairs, MT
• Fort Peck Agency, Bureau of Indian Affairs, MT
• Northern Cheyenne Agency, Bureau of Indian Affairs, MT
• The Osage Nation, OK
• The St. Regis Mohawk Tribe, NY

The report is primarily centered on trends, themes, and differences in Tribal DR practice. A number of themes emerged, including the following:

• Role of Culture. Tribes discussed the different ways they incorporate their culture in DR or making DR more culturally competent. Examples included informing elders and other Tribal members of DR and gaining their input on implementation, using parenting time as an opportunity to share Tribal traditions, and using the clan system to engage extended family.
• Relationship building. Because DR is focused on engagement, Tribal representatives discussed how DR can strengthen families by enhancing trust. Removal as a last resort was a common element among all programs regardless of cultural implementation.
• Altering Approaches. Tribes discussed the different ways they altered approaches to implementation to better meet the needs of their communities. Changes in language, service duration, and decision-making were among some of the alterations discussed.
• Working Differently With Law Enforcement and Judicial Communities. Tribes discussed the various ways they engaged law enforcement and the courts in DR practice and approaches.  
• Stages When Families Are Approached and Engaged. Participants discussed varied approaches and processes regarding when families were approached and engaged and the duration of services.

Summary of the Tribal Symposium on Differential Response is available on the QIC-DR website:

http://www.differentialresponseqic.org/assets/docs/tribal-symposium-summary.pdf  (8 MB)

The Children's Bureau's Training and Technical Assistance (T&TA) Network continues to produce resources that can help States and Tribes in their work with children and families. Some recent resources are listed below:

• Child Welfare Information Gateway has published updates to a number of its State statutes documents:
  
  • Collection of Family Information About Adopted Persons and Their Birth Families:
    http://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/laws_policies/statutes/collection.cfm
  • Immunity for Reporters of Child Abuse and Neglect:
    http://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/laws_policies/statutes/immunity.cfm
  • Who May Adopt, Be Adopted, or Place a Child for Adoption:
    http://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/laws_policies/statutes/parties.cfm
  • Court Hearings for the Permanent Placement of Children:
    http://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/laws_policies/statutes/planning.cfm
• The National Abandoned Infants Assistance Resource Center (AIA) offers two free online tutorials that can be used to earn continuing education (CE) credits (http://aia.berkeley.edu/training/tutorials/onlinetutorials.php):
  
  • "Women and Children with HIV/AIDS" provides participants with a better understanding of the prevalence, nature and impact of HIV/AIDS on this population, as well as treatment and intervention.
  • "Substance Use During Pregnancy: Prevalence, Impact and Solutions" reviews the potential impact of prenatal exposure to various legal and illegal drugs on infant development and well-being and examines interventions for the prevention and treatment of drug use during pregnancy, from identification and education to individual and family based services.
• The National Center on Substance Abuse and Child Welfare (NCSACW) has developed "Bringing Families Together: Models of Hope and Recovery," which describes a 10-element framework of system linkages, to help States, Tribes, and local communities overcome barriers and identify strategies for effective partnerships between mental health services, substance use treatment, child welfare, and family courts: http://www.ncsacw.samhsa.gov/improving/improving-video.aspx
• The National Child Welfare Resource Center on Legal and Judicial Issues (NRCLJI) has posted a recording of its May webinar, "Child Well-Being Outcome Measures for Courts," available at http://icmelearning.com/well-being-webcast/
• The National Child Welfare Workforce Institute (NCWWI) has published a resource list on Child Welfare Supervision at http://www.ncwwi.org/docs/NCWWI_Resource_List_13_CW_Supervision.pdf (216 KB)
• The National Quality Improvement Center on Differential Response in Child Protective Services (QIC DR) has published Year 1 site visit reports on each of its three projects:
  
  • Colorado Year 1 Site Visit Report at http://www.differentialresponseqic.org/assets/docs/colorado-year-1-site-visit.pdf (921 KB)
  • Differential Response in Illinois: 2011 Site Visit Report at http://www.differentialresponseqic.org/assets/docs/illinois-site-visit-report.pdf (3.06 MB)
  • Ohio SOAR Project: Year 1 Site Visit Report at http://www.differentialresponseqic.org/assets/docs/ohio-year-1-site-visit-report.pdf (1.31 MB)
• The National Resource Center for In-Home Services (NRC In-Home) has posted Tribal In-Home Services Practice Model Description as a part of a project to reduce the disproportionate out-of-home placement of Alaska Native children: http://nrcinhome.socialwork.uiowa.edu/resources/documents/TribalIn-homePracticeModelTemplate.pdf (641 KB)
• The National Resource Center for Permanency and Family Connections (NRCPFC) has updated its sibling information packet, Sibling Placement: The Importance of the Sibling Relationship for Children in Foster Care:
  http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/socwork/nrcfcpp/downloads/information_packets/Sibling_Placement.pdf (637 KB)
• The National Resource Center for Recruitment and Retention of Foster and Adoptive Parents at AdoptUSKids (NRCRRFAP) has a new web section designed for Spanish-speaking parents who want to learn more about adoption and foster care: http://adoptuskids.org/para-familias

The spring 2012 issue of Child Rights Litigation, an American Bar Association (ABA) publication, features an article about meeting the needs of children with incarcerated parents. The authors also touch on collaborative opportunities and best practices between the child welfare and justice systems. Three case studies are provided by attorneys and guardians ad litem, each focused on visitation and accompanied by a mental health analysis. The article is a follow-up to "A Voice for the Young Child With an Incarcerated Parent," which focused on the mental health aspect of parent-child separation and visiting with incarcerated parents.

In one of the case studies, a 3-year-old boy removed from his mother's care at 20 months experienced multiple relative and nonrelative placements. During visits with his mother at a jail/substance abuse treatment facility, the boy exhibited uncharacteristic behaviors, including hitting and biting. His caregiver reported that the behavior continued for 1 week after the visit. It was determined that the facility was not an appropriate place for the boy and his mother, and visiting was suspended; however, it was decided that visiting could resume in a therapeutic setting after the mother completed treatment.

The mental health analysis following the case study points to several holes and missing details in the case study. There was no mention of a case plan goal, such as reunification or filing for permanent custody, or goals for visiting. These missing details are important because they may determine the appropriate tools used by mental health practitioners to help the boy and his mother achieve case plan and/or visiting goals.

The other case studies explore the experiences of three young siblings who were removed from their parents due to multiple incarcerations for theft, drug abuse, and child endangerment charges, and a teenager whose parental visits helped to improve his behavioral problems and other therapeutic struggles.

"Meeting the Needs of Children With an Incarcerated Parent," by Lynne Reckman, Katie Gates, Meredith Schnug, and Debra Rothstein, Child Rights Litigation, Spring 2012, is available on the American Bar Association's website:

http://apps.americanbar.org/litigation/committees/childrights/newsletter.html

Related Items

For more information on and resources for working with children with incarcerated parents, visit the following pages on the Child Welfare Information Gateway website: 

• Services to Children and Families of Prisoners
• Children in Out-of-Home Care With Incarcerated Parents

Children's Bureau Express most recently covered the topic of incarcerated parents in the following articles:

• "When a Parent Is Incarcerated" (March 2012)
• "Supporting Incarcerated and Reentering Fathers" (December 2011/January 2012)
• "A Toolkit for Working With Children of Incarcerated Parents" (April 2010)

The spring 2012 issue of CW360° is dedicated to the topic of secondary trauma and the child welfare workforce. Twenty-four articles written by a wide variety of child welfare, medical, mental health, and other related professionals and researchers provide a comprehensive look at this relatively new and important concept.

Much research has been done on secondary trauma as it relates to emergency responders and mental health practitioners. However, with respect to the child welfare field, research in this area is lacking and has historically focused on turnover and burnout. Secondary traumatic stress (STS), often mistaken for burnout, can develop when a person empathizes with a traumatized individual. The article "Occupational Hazards of Work in Child Welfare: Direct Trauma, Secondary Trauma and Burnout," by Kimberly Shackelford, explains the symptoms of posttraumatic stress, secondary traumatic stress, and burnout.

Anita P. Barbee's article, "Social Support in the Workplace and Secondary Trauma," provides research on the role of workplace supports and worker retention. Special attention is paid to the role supervisors play in helping workers stave off the effects of secondary trauma. Other articles in this issue, which is organized into three sections—overview, practice, and perspectives and collaborations—discuss STS and the need for the child welfare workforce to address the issue at a systemic level.

CW360° is published annually by the Center for Advanced Studies in Child Welfare at the University of Minnesota's School of Social Work and is available on the Center's website:

http://www.cehd.umn.edu/ssw/cascw/attributes/PDF/publications/CW360_2012.pdf (2 MB)

Less than half of all incidents of child victimizations are known to police, schools, or medical authorities, according to the latest National Study of Children's Exposure to Violence (NatSCEV). Authorities were more likely to know about victimization perpetrated by adults and more serious victimizations, like kidnapping and sexual or physical assault, and were less likely to know about peer-to-peer victimization. The study's findings can help authorities target prevention and treatment services for underreported victimization types and encourage more disclosures from underserved groups.

NatSCEV researchers conducted telephone interviews with a nationally representative sample of the parents of 4,549 children up to age 18; children older than 10 were also interviewed when appropriate. Participants were asked to report the child's lifetime victimization experiences and whether they knew if authorities were aware of the victimization. Researchers compared the results to authorities' past-year data on known victimizations, including those they witnessed or received through a report.

Altogether, authorities knew of 45.7 percent of victimizations. Schools knew of 42.3 percent, police knew of 12.7 percent, and medical authorities knew of 1.8 percent of victimizations. Among the study's findings:

• Authorities were least likely to know of peer-to-peer victimizations such as peer or sibling assault, dating violence, being flashed, and completed or attempted rape.
• Victimizations more likely to be known to authorities included those involving a serious injury, a nonfamily or adult perpetrator, a biased motivation, a female or low-socioeconomic status victim, and a victim who had experienced multiple victimizations.
• Different authorities were aware of different victimization types, e.g., police were more likely to know about kidnapping, neglect, sexual abuse by an adult, and witnessing domestic violence, while schools were more likely to know about attempts or threats rather than assaults and incidents involving children younger than 13.

The study found that the number of disclosures of child victimizations has increased compared to the results of a similar study performed two decades ago. Increasing disclosures of victimizations can help contribute to prevention by improving victims' access to treatment and support services and raising community awareness. The study's authors recommend that authorities increase outreach to male victims and victims with a higher socioeconomic status as well as direct more resources toward underreported incidents involving family members and peers. Collaboration among police, schools, and medical authorities may also improve cross-training on effective responses to disclosures and increase the availability of community resources to support victims and their families.

The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), U.S. Department of Justice funds NatSCEV. "Child and Youth Victimization Known to Police, School, and Medical Authorities," by D. Finkelhor, R. Ormrod, H. Turner, and S. Hamby, was published in Juvenile Justice Bulletin, April 2012, and is available to download from the OJJDP website:

http://www.ojjdp.gov/pubs/235394.pdf (577 KB)

After the 2008 Child and Family Services Review (CFSR) showed poor permanency outcomes for youth in New York State, staff at Hillside Family of Agencies realized something had to change. To bolster their efforts to achieve better permanency outcomes, Hillside, in 2010, implemented two segments of family finding services: (1) quality family finding training and technical assistance (T&TA) to staff across public and private child welfare, mental health, juvenile justice, and developmental disabilities sectors and (2) services for youth.

Hillside Family of Agencies is one of the largest nonprofit agencies in New York State and offers a range of health and human services to the public and private sectors. Hillside's Institute for Family Connections offers the family finding T&TA that is specifically endorsed by the creator of the family finding model, Kevin Campbell. Family finding services for youth served by Hillside are offered by the organization's community-based clinicians.

Deborah Rosen, Director for the Hillside Institute for Family Connections, said the concept of family finding goes beyond finding immediate or extended family members for youth in care. "Young people need to be connected to permanent and loving families, but also to resilient communities. We're looking at redefining connectedness." She added that family finding requires a shift in mindset to include not just moms, dads, and grandparents, but any person the child is related to or cares about because it's important to think of this as expanding the universe of possibility for the child.

The definition of "related" also requires a new mindset, said Linda Kurtz, Senior Fellow at the Hillside Institute for Family Connections. "It's about reaching out to the child's third-grade teacher, former basketball coach, the mom's best friend, a Girl Scout leader, or a neighbor—anyone willing to commit to a plan of creating a permanent, lifelong network of connectedness for youth."

With this new definition of family in mind, Hillside family finders aim to identify a minimum of 40 adults to whom the youth is connected. Family members then come together for the blended perspective meeting at which they discuss the child's needs—with an emphasis on unconditional support and love—and members' abilities to fill those needs, and they develop a realistic plan for the youth's safety and well-being. The goal of creating a lifelong network of connectedness for youth, said Tess Mahnken-Weatherspoon, Hillside's Family Finding Practice Leader, goes beyond permanency as just a place to live. "We want to create a network of at least eight adults for each youth, and these adults can provide more than just a living situation. They can write letters, have phone conversations, provide any action that lets these children know they are loved and that someone cares about them." 

While finding 40 connections per youth is the goal, that goal is sometimes exceeded. For one boy who had limited visitation with his mother and hadn't seen his father in 12 years, Hillside family finders identified 184 connections. Mahnken-Weatherspoon added that not all 184 people are likely to provide solid support for the young man; however, if just a few of them prove to be good resources it increases the boy's likelihood of permanency and well-being now and into adulthood. In just 2 years, Hillside has worked to find family members and reconnect more than 120 youth to caring adults.

Implementation of the family finding model began with a rigorous approach to fidelity and close collaboration with Campbell. Staff wanted to go beyond regular search and engagement efforts and develop a comprehensive curriculum. The first step was piloting the curriculum internally and revising it before rolling it out to counties and agencies. Hillside implemented a 6-month learn-by-doing training for staff, who were asked to pick one youth within their caseload. Trainings involved leadership at the highest levels possible so supervisors, managers, and higher authorities could recognize the policy and procedure changes required for family finding practice. Ongoing T&TA and coaching provides the necessary support to ensure casework is faithful to the model, timely, and practiced with the sense of urgency required to achieve connectedness for young people.

With the support of New York State Of Children and Family Services, Hillside's Institute for Family Connections has trained staff in 15 New York State local Departments of Social Services, seven New York State voluntary agencies, and one Tribe since September 2011, all with a child welfare focus. At the time of this writing, staff were in the midst of a condensed training to six mental health and residential health organizations in New York State. Additionally, Rosen and Campbell are working together to train the state of Ohio's juvenile parole workforce.

More information on Hillside Family of Agency's Family Finding programs is available on their website:

http://www.hillside.com/familyfinding/

Special thanks to Deborah Rosen, Director for the Hillside Institute for Family Connections, Linda Kurtz, Senior Fellow at the Hillside Institute for Family Connections, and Tess Mahnken-Weatherspoon, Hillside's Family Finding Practice Leader, for providing information for this article.

Kinship caregivers raising the children of relatives, especially relatives affected by substance abuse, need help from professionals to establish appropriate boundaries and set limits to their support, according to a new study published in the journal Families in Society. There are numerous benefits to placing children with kin; however, researchers found that kinship care arrangements in which parents perceive unlimited support and unclear boundaries regarding visits with their children can contribute to lower reunification rates.

Using indepth interviews with 26 mothers with histories of addiction and 20 professionals (including substance abuse, child protection, and parenting professionals), researchers identified the following types of kinship care arrangements and explored their impact on reunification:

• "Limited family support" or "family support with parameters": Families had limited resources to offer or kin caregivers established clear limits to the support they would provide. Mothers focused more on treatment because they felt better knowing their children were with family; knowing the limits of kin's support motivated mothers to make changes necessary to regain custody.
• "Enabling family support": Kin caregivers did not set clear limits or mothers perceived the resources and support as unlimited. Mothers continued to see their children, sometimes in violation of their case plan restrictions, and did not feel much urgency to achieve substance abuse treatment or child welfare goals.

The study found that mothers with limited support or support with boundaries reported greater service satisfaction and achieved higher rates of reunification; mothers with enabling support, which included about half the mothers in the study, reunited less frequently with their children, and their children spent more time in care. Several mothers receiving enabling support described the arrangement as "the best of both worlds," because they could continue their relationship with their children without feeling the need to address their substance abuse problems. The professionals in the study said this lack of urgency greatly interfered with reunification and described families' unlimited offers of support as counterproductive.

The author of the study advised that professionals have an important role to play in helping kinship caregivers to (1) understand the fine line between helpful support and enabling support and (2) effectively communicate their support to the children's parents. Professionals should encourage kinship caregivers to emphasize the temporary nature of their arrangement with parents and set healthy boundaries for the parents' relationship with their children during that time. Doing so may help parents achieve the goals necessary for reunification, resulting in better outcomes for children and families.

"The Best of Both Worlds: How Kinship Care Impacts Reunification," by J. M. Blakey, was published in Families in Society, 93(2), 2012, and the abstract is available on the journal's website:

http://www.familiesinsociety.org/ShowAbstract.asp?docid=4194

Parent-child and sibling visiting is an important component of family-centered practice that can help achieve timely reunification. The State of Florida has successfully implemented a community-based parent-child and sibling visiting program that is rooted in encouragement and is yielding positive outcomes. A peer-to-peer phone call in May, organized by Children's Bureau Staff in Region 4, allowed other States to hear about Florida's experience developing, implementing, and maintaining its visitation program.

The common threads throughout Florida's visiting program are encouragement and capacity building for parents. The State facilitates regular visits and the use of family teams, which are established early and composed of caregivers, relatives, or family friends familiar with the family and its situation. Visits often occur within the first 24 hours of removal and, according to Trisha Dees, a case manager from Families First, a local community-based care provider, usually within 10–12 hours. The Families First agency ensures that within the first 3 days, a progressive visitation plan is developed to help set parent, caregiver, and child expectations. "When a removal occurs, it disrupts the family's entire world. A progressive visitation plan allows them to know what's happening next and better understand what's required to reunite the family," Dees said.

Visits often take place at the parent's home—or another familiar setting—and members of the family team, as opposed to Department of Children and Families (DCF) staff, conduct supervision. These circumstances provide an environment where children and parents feel more comfortable, which can make the visit more productive and relieves caseworkers of supervision duties. Supervisors and parents are encouraged to center visits on a purpose or activity that supports bonding among parents, children, and siblings and allows parents to practice modeling behaviors and parenting skills.

The courts are involved in visitation from the very beginning of the case. At the first shelter hearing, judges are informed as to whether protective investigators have assessed the child's new living arrangement, and all involved parties discuss the earliest occasion for parenting opportunities. The Hon. Lynn Tepper, a Circuit Court judge, said there is no cookie-cutter approach to visitation, and the tone of the court should be chatty, positive, and not judgmental. "The art of encouragement is key. We have to think outside the box and come up with creative solutions specific to each family and their needs."

Steve Pennypacker, Northwest Region Director of Children's Legal Services, echoed that sentiment from the attorney's perspective: "We go to the first hearing with 'when will the parent visit?' in mind. Children start to wonder if removal is their fault, and they worry about their parents. The longer you go without visitation, the worse it is for everyone." Tepper added that regular visiting has proven a powerful incentive for parents suffering from substance abuse to engage in services immediately and seek treatment.

When asked how the State handles parents who miss visits, Tepper said, in her experience, frequent visiting reduces the number of noncompliant parents and the need to reshelter children. "When parents realize the court is not interested in finding fault and is solely invested in helping the family reunite and stay safe, a transformation occurs. There is a tectonic shift in relationship healing when parents are given frequent parenting opportunities, and the children are given the opportunity to trust again. After 2 years of implementation, we've been successful in avoiding resheltering children."

After the Federal Child and Family Services Review (CFSR) in 2008, Florida's Dependency Court Improvement Program (CIP) examined the role that judges could play in visitation. Through the collaboration of CIP's statewide multidisciplinary panel, visitation protocols were developed and included in the 2011 Dependency Benchbook. The protocols were further highlighted at the Fall 2011 Model Courts All-sites Meeting. As a result of this meeting, CIP staff began coordinating trainings on visitation throughout the State, and as interest in this issue increased, so did questions concerning  the research and some of the recommendations featured within the protocols. In January 2012, Florida's CIP formed an ad hoc visitation workgroup, which was composed of child development experts, foster parents, former foster youth, case managers, agency attorneys and administrators, parent attorneys, community-based care representatives, judges, and court staff. The workgroup is revising and enhancing the protocols to further highlight considerations for judges regarding visitation safety, frequency, quality, and individualization. The revised protocols will be released this year.

Other key players in the State's visiting program are foster parents. Foster parents are trained to participate in coparenting—often transporting children to visits and testifying in court—and experienced foster parents help train newer caregivers. Foster parents work as part of the family team and with birth parents. Trudy Petkovich, President of the Florida State Foster/Adoptive Association, said coparenting teaches foster parents how to enhance outcomes for children, and it can help build a stronger family unit for the long term.

As part of Florida's Quality Parenting Initiative, foster parents also have access to training specific to their needs and questions. "At any point, a foster parent can email his or her concern and ask for a specific training, which will be online within a week. It enables foster parents to better work with birth parents, managers, administrations, the legal system, and puts everyone on the same page."

Florida State University's Clearinghouse on Supervised Visitation offers comprehensive training and technical assistance for all its supervised visiting programs in all judicial circuits. A bevy of free training materials, toolkits, manuals, and more are available on the website:

http://familyvio.csw.fsu.edu/clearinghouse/

Special thanks to Trisha Dees, Case Manager, Families First, Judge Lynn Tepper, Circuit Court Judge, Trudy Petkovich, Foster Parent and President of the Florida State Foster/Adoptive Association, Sandy Neidert, Office of the State Court Administrator, Steve Pennypacker, Northwest Region Director of Children's Legal Services, and Karen Oehme, Florida State University, Supervised Visiting Program, for providing information for this article.

Related Item

Children's Bureau Express last wrote about Florida CIP's CFSR-driven efforts for court improvement in "Florida's Court Improvement Program" (September 2010).

The May 2012 issue of Fostering Perspectives focuses on child and family team meetings (CFTs) in the North Carolina child welfare system. Articles aim to help foster and birth parents better understand CFTs and provide child welfare professionals with resources to make CFTs more successful.

The issue also includes the winning entries from a writing contest in which young people in foster care were asked to answer the question "Who would you invite to a CFT, and why?" The winning entries provide insight into youths' views of the most significant members in their support system.

Other article topics in the May issue include the following:

• What people should know about CFTs in North Carolina
• What foster parents can do to help a CFT be a success
• What birth families want from CFTs, including before, during, and after the meeting
• How a facilitator views CFTs

Fostering Perspectives is sponsored by the North Carolina Division of Social Services and the Family and Children's Resource Program. The May issue is available on the Fostering Connections website:

http://www.fosteringperspectives.org/fpv16n2/v16n2.htm 

To improve and enhance multiagency investigations and prosecutions of child abuse and neglect cases, a guide for developing a uniform set of protocols has been made available by the California Child Abuse Training and Technical Assistance Centers (CATTA). The Minimum Standard Protocol is an organizational tool intended to help county and State agencies develop written procedures for investigations. The tool is composed of five phases—preparation, writing, adoption, training, and revision.

CATTA provides training and technical assistance to child advocacy centers, multidisciplinary interview centers or teams, and child sexual abuse prevention, intervention, and treatment service providers. A one-page introduction to the minimum standard protocol, the Minimum Standards Protocol, and a checklist—a guide to protocol development—are available on the CATTA website:

http://cirinc.org/catta/?page_id=906

The American Bar Association's Children and the Law, Education Law Center, and Juvenile Law Center, published a foster care and education factsheet about the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) to guide information sharing among child welfare systems, schools, and the courts. FERPA provisions dictate which types of information can be shared, with whom, and how.

How Can Child Welfare Agencies Access Education Records in Compliance With the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA)? answers the following questions:

1. Why is sharing information between child welfare, education agencies, and the courts important?
2. What is the impact of FERPA on information sharing?
3. Can a school release education records to comply with a court order?
4. Is there any child-specific information that schools can release without parental consent?
5. Are there other FERPA exceptions that can help child welfare education systems share personally identifiable (PII) student information for statistical purposes, and how do recent changes to the FERPA regulations impact data sharing?
6. Where can I learn more about this topic and other topics that relate to education for children in care?

The factsheet is available on the American Bar Association's website:

http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publications/center_on_children_and_the_law/education/qadatapuzzle2012.authcheckdam.pdf (49 KB)

More information about the Legal Center for Foster Care and Education is available here:

http://www.americanbar.org/groups/child_law/what_we_do/projects/education.html
 

The National Collaborative on Workforce and Disability for Youth (NCWD/Youth) released a guide for professionals working with youth who need assistance with college and career readiness or transition planning. While the guide is not specific to foster care or child welfare, it can aid professionals working with youth who have individualized learning plans (ILPs).

The guide, Promoting Quality Individualized Learning Plans: A "How to Guide" Focused on the High School Years, provides sample ILP curricula, State-specific ILP and career resources, web-based ILP and career exploration tools, and other resources. The guide is intended to help professionals guide students through closing the gap between college and career readiness.

The ILP tool is available on the NCWD/Youth website:

http://www.ncwd-youth.info/ilp/how-to-guide

The spring 2012 issue of Rise magazine focuses on the trauma suffered by parents of children who experienced out-of-home care. Powerful articles written by parents long after reunification explore their guilt, struggles to reconnect with their children, and efforts to address their children's feelings of abandonment. One article highlights an intensive in-home treatment program for children and youth with emotional and behavioral disorders or those who have experienced sexual abuse. 

Rise, 21, 2012, "The Long Shadow of Foster Care," is available on the magazine's website:

http://www.risemagazine.org/PDF/Rise_issue_21.pdf?utm_source=Rise+April+16+2012&utm_campaign=RISE%2C+4%2F16%2F12&utm_medium=email (705 KB) 

The Center for Advanced Studies in Child Welfare (CASCW) released the second guide in its policy brief series based on the 2011 CWO360°: Child Welfare and Technology. The guide, Child Welfare and Technology: A Guide for Policymakers, explores how technology is used in Minnesota's child protection, foster care, and adoption systems.

The guide is meant to be a "user's guide" for policymakers, directing them toward influential articles and solutions regarding common policy problems. Citations throughout the brief link to the full text in CWO360°: Child Welfare and Technology. The guide tackles three policy problems—large and incompatible data systems, challenges maintaining accurate data records, and the effects of budget constraints on quality connections—and provides solutions and a list of further reading for each emerging issue.

CASCW is a nonpartisan research and training center at the University of Minnesota School of Social Work. Child Welfare and Technology: A Guide for Policymakers is available on the University's website:

http://www.cehd.umn.edu/ssw/cascw/attributes/PDF/Policy/PolicyBrief_Technology_03-12.pdf (366 KB)

More information about CASCW is available here:

http://www.cehd.umn.edu/ssw/cascw/

SparkAction, a website with tools and information for those who work with children and youth, has shared a new toolkit by Young Invincibles. "Get Covered: A Health Care Toolkit for Gen Y" is designed to help youth understand all aspects of health care. Written by and for young people, the rereleased toolkit serves as a guide for young adults about obtaining health care coverage—either by remaining on a parent's plan or purchasing their own plan—with special sections on preexisting conditions, cancer, and women's health issues. After entering an email address, users can download the full toolkit with information specific to where they live and resources available in their State.

The toolkit consists of several topics, including the following:

• Health options when the student has graduated
• How to and if they are eligible to join their parent's insurance plan
• Glossary of terms to know when buying an insurance plan
• A section for young women covering pregnancy prevention, contraceptives, and pregnancy
• How to handle preexisting conditions
• Young adults and cancer

For more information and to download the full toolkit, visit the SparkAction website:

http://sparkaction.org/content/get-covered-health-care-toolkit-geny?utm_source=SparkUpdate%3A+May+1%2C+2012&utm_campaign=SparkUpdate&utm_medium=email

 

Children and youth in foster care often have symptoms and behaviors that may require assessment for possible pharmacological support. In Arizona, the Child and Family Team (CFT) process facilitates discussions around the need for appropriate services, which may involve a referral for psychiatric assessment and medication treatment. The tip sheet Guidelines for Caregivers: Are You Prepared for Your Child's Psychiatric Evaluation? by the Arizona Department of Economic Security, Division of Children, Youth and Families, provides caregivers with a checklist of questions to ask during the evaluation and medication monitoring appointments. This brief guide focuses on the following key recommendations:

• Explain the purpose of the visit with the child
• Describe child behavior in detail
• Provide relevant medical records
• Review diagnosis and medication treatment plan
• Discuss pros and cons of medication, side effects, etc.
• Evaluate the informed consent form

After the evaluation, additional areas of focus relate to the prescription, use, and management of any medications. The tip sheet is available on the Arizona Department of Economic Security website:

https://www.azdes.gov/InternetFiles/Pamphlets/pdf/ACY-1236A.pdf (981 KB)
 

Upcoming national conferences on child welfare and adoption through October 2012 include:

August 2012

• 35th National Child Welfare, Juvenile, and Family Law Conference
  National Association of Counsel for Children
  August 8–16, Chicago, IL
  http://www.naccchildlaw.org/?page=NationalConference
• West Coast Child Welfare Trainers Conference
  University of Washington, School of Social Work
  August 22–24, Seattle, WA
  http://www.nationalcac.org/events/prev-con.html
• 13th National Conference on Child Sexual Abuse and Exploitation Prevention
  National Children's Advocacy Center
  August 28–30, New Orleans, LA
  http://www.nationalcac.org/national-conferences/prev-con.html

September 2012

• The 25th Annual National Independent Living Conference
  Growing Pains 2012
  Daniel Kids Foundation
  September 4–7, Atlanta, GA
  http://www.danielkids.org/page.aspx?pid=430
• Family Drug Court: A National Symposium to Improve Family Recovery, Safety and Stability
  Children and Family Futures
  September 5–9, Anaheim , CA
  http://www.cffutures.org/presentations/conferences
• Strengthening Connections Between Parents and Children Affected by Substance Abuse, HIV and Trauma
  National Abandoned Infants Assistance Resource Center
  September 10–12, Austin, TX
  http://aia.berkeley.edu/strengthening_connections/index.php
• Twelfth International Conference on Shaken Baby Syndrome/Abusive Head Trauma
  National Center on Shaken Baby Syndrome
  September 29–October 1, Boston, MA
  http://www.dontshake.org/sbs.php?topNavID=5&subNavID=38

October 2012

• National Staff Development and Training Association Profession Institute
  American Public Human Services Association
  October 14–17, Portland, OR
  http://nsdta.aphsa.org/pro_dev_inst.htm
• 7th Biennial Adoption Conference "Best Interests of the Child?"
  Race, Religion, and Rescue in Adoption
  The Adoption Initiative/St. John's University
  October 18–20, New York, NY
  http://adoptioninitiative.org
• 10th Annual Together We Can Conference
  Together We Can C/O Team Dynamics
  October 23–25, Lafayette, LA
  http://www.latwc.com

Further details about national and regional child welfare and adoption conferences can be found through the Conference Calendar Search feature on the Child Welfare Information Gateway website:

http://www.childwelfare.gov/calendar/index.cfm

The National Collaborative on Workforce and Disability for Youth (NCWD/Youth) offers eight training modules to support professionals working with youth. The Youth Service Professionals' Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities (YSP/KSA) Initiative develops 10 competency areas through 1-day interactive sessions. The modules include the following:

• Knowledge of the Field: This Work That We Do
• Communication With Youth: The Helping Relationship
• Assessment and Individualized Planning: Charting a Course With Youth
• Relationship to Family: Working Together
• Career Exploration and Workforce Preparation: Youth Opening the Door to the World of Work
• Community Resources: Weaving a Web for Youth
• Employer Relations: Beyond the Handshake
• Program Design, Delivery, and Administration: It's All in the Design

More information and overviews of each training module are available on the NCWD/Youth website:

http://www.ncwd-youth.info/ksa/training-modules

The March issue of Training Matters, a publication of the North Carolina Division of Social Services (NC DSS) Child Welfare Services Statewide Training Partnership, is centered on the theme "Substance Abuse and Child Welfare: Training Resources." The issue is a complement to Children's Services Practice Notes 17(1), which focused on prescription drug use and the implications of family drug use on child welfare practice.

The issue highlights trainings provided by the North Carolina DSS and online self-tutorials provided by the National Center on Substance Abuse and Child Welfare. Tips for working with medical providers and a feature on a practice model for child welfare and substance abuse are also included in the issue.

Training Matters 13(2) is available here:

http://www.trainingmatters-nc.org/tm_v13n2/tmv13n2.pdf  (188 KB)

Children's Services Practice Notes 17(1) is available here:

http://www.practicenotes.org/v17n1.htm