Task Force Smith and the 24th Infantry Division in Korea ...
1 DIVISION OF FAMILY & CHILDREN SERVICES G-FORCE MEETING April 23, 2009.
-
Upload
dora-perry -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
0
Transcript of 1 DIVISION OF FAMILY & CHILDREN SERVICES G-FORCE MEETING April 23, 2009.
1
DIVISION OF FAMILY
& CHILDREN SERVICES
G-FORCE MEETING
April 23, 2009
2
AGENDA
• Safety
• Permanency
• Well-being
• Family Independence
3
4
5
RECURRENCE OF MALTREATMENTMarch 2008 – March 2009
National Standard=
5.4% or less
6
7
Lag Measure: Increase Safety Response from 65% to 95% by June 2009
65 70 75 80 85 90 95 96 98 100
Score for April 23, 2009: 97.6%
Oct
76%
Sep
65%
Nov
75%
Dec
81%
Jan
92%
Feb
96%
Apr
97.6%
Mar
97%
8
Lead Measure 1: Increase Timely Completion of Investigations from 93% to 100% by June 2009
91 97 100
Score on April 23, 2009: 99.7% Timely
98 999692 94
Oct
95%
Nov
91%
Sept
93%
Dec
93%
Jan
97%
Feb
98%
March
99%
Apr
99.7%
99.5
9
NUMBER OF OVERDUE PENDING CASES
April 23, 2009: 3 CASES PENDING OVERDUE
REFLECTS THE NUMBER OF
CASES PENDING
OVERDUE AT THE END OF
EACH MONTH.
10
Lead Measure 2: Increase Timeliness of Responses to Reports of Abuse/Neglect from from 46% to 90%
by June 200995
Score for April 20, 2009: 96% Timely
908570 8050 60 6540
Sep 08
46%
Oct 08
57%
Nov 08
59%
Dec 08
70%Jan
88%Feb
95%
Mar
96%
75 100
Apr
96%
11
PERCENTAGE OF INVESTIGATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN PENDING 31 TO 45 DAYS
April 20, 2009: 15.9% OF INVESTIGATIONS HAVE BEEN PENDING 31 TO 45 DAYS
GOAL
12
PERCENTAGE OF INVESTIGATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN PENDING 35 TO 45 DAYS
GOAL
April 20, 2009: 10.9% OF INVESTIGATIONS HAVE BEEN PENDING 35 TO 45 DAYS
13
1415% of investigations resulted in children coming into care in February 2009.
15
16
17
SAFETY RESOURCES
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
PERCENT CHANGE IN NUMBER OF DAYSOctober 2008 to March 2009
Region Change
1 18.8%
2 17.7%
3 9.6%
4 11.1%
5 20.9%
6 29.8%
7 41.9%
8 0.0%
9 5.6%
10 0.0%
11 36.3%
12 62.5%
13 18.5%
14 17.4%
15 0.0%
16 22.0%
17 48.8%
38
NATIONAL STUDY REGARDING KINSHIP CARE
Most kinship arrangements are grandparents or other close relatives.
Kinship families are predominately families of color.
Kinship families tend to have limited income.
Kinship families have less formal contact with social
workers than traditional foster care families.
Source: Kinship/Relative Care; Katherine Maurer (2001).
39
RELATIONSHIP OF SAFETY RESOURCE CARETAKER TO CHILD IN GEORGIA
Safety Resource Caretakers
Grandparent,
45%
Aunt/Uncle,
22.2%
Non-Relatives,
17.4%
Other Relatives,
8.4%
Other Parent,
7%
Data from SHINES
40
ADVANTAGES OF KINSHIP CARE Provides a safety net for children who might
otherwise be in the foster care.
Provides children with a sense of family support.
Children have more frequent visits with birth parents and siblings.
More likely to accept sibling groups.
Maintain cultural continuity and community ties such as with school and friends.
Provides an opportunity for permanence should a child enter into legal custody of the state.
Source: National Survey of America’s Families, Urban Institute (2001).
In Georgia, 30% of the children who entered care were placed with individuals who served as their Safety Resource.
41
LIMITATIONS OF KINSHIP CARE
41% live in families with income less than 100% of the federal poverty level (FPL).
36% live with a caretaker without a high school degree.
55% live with a single parent.
19% live in households with four or more children.
Source: Children Cared for by Relatives, Jennifer Ehrle Macomber (2001).
42
LIMITATIONS CONTINUED
Less likely to receive payments and services such as training, assessments, counseling or visits from an agency.
May not meet the health and safety standards of the more regulated forms of foster care.
Many safety resources are grandparents coping with reduced income levels and increased health problems.
Un-supervised arrangement.
Source: Kinship Care by Pamela Gough (2006).
43
CHILDREN IN SAFETY RESOURCES 90 DAYS OR MORE BY REGION
Number Percent of Total
1 15 7.5%
2 19 9.5%
3 21 10.6%
4 20 10.1%
5 34 17.1%
6 13 6.5%
7 7 3.5%
8 24 12.1%
9 6 3.0%
10 5 2.5%
11 12 6.0%
12 0 0.0%
13 9 4.5%
14 4 2.0%
15 2 1.0%
16 4 2.0%
17 4 2.0%
State 199
44
COMPARISON OF SAFETY RESOURCE CARETAKERS BY LENGTH OF STAY: 90 DAYS OR MORE & OVERALL POPULATION OF CHILDREN IN SAFETY RESOURCES
Children in safety
resources for 90 days or
more tend to be placed with grandparents and less likely
to be with nonfamily members.
45
PERMANENCY
46
47
REASONS CHILDREN EXITED CARESFY2008 & SFY2009
The majority, 85%, of children left care for positive permanency reasons.
48
REASONS CHILDREN EXITED CARENATIONALLY & GEORGIA
FFY 2006, SFY2008 & SFY2009
49
50
FOSTER CARE RE-ENTRY RATEMarch 2008 – March 2009
Of the children who entered care in March 2009, only 1.92% had exited care during the past 12 months.
National standard: less than or equal to 8.60%
Child and Family Services Improvement Act of 2006
•Increase the Frequency and Quality of Visits
•Improve Effectiveness of Frontline and Supervisory Practice
•Improve Safety, Permanency and Well-Being Outcomes
for Children in our Care
52
Federal Target
At Least 90% Of Children in Care Are Visited Every Month
Over 50% Of The Visits Occur
In The Home
Goal by Goal by Oct 1, 2011Oct 1, 2011
GA’s baseline 2007
51% visited every month
82% seen in the home
53
Annual State TargetsPercent of children in our care who are
seen every month they are in care
2011 90% Sustaining Accomplishment
2010 85% Sustaining the Effort
Combating “Target Fatigue”
2009 71% 15+% Increase
Full Engagement State Capacity to Meet New
Expectations
2008 56% Conservative and Attainable 5+%
2007 51 % Baseline
54
First Round of Data Collection
Year ECEM Visits ECEM Visits In-Home
Target Actual Visits
2011 90 %
2010 85%
2009 71%
2008 56%
2007 Baseline 51% 82%
55
Region 25-Mar-09 13-Apr-09 17-Apr-09 23-Apr-09
1 28.5% 43.11% 47.80% 57.04%
2 34.6% 46.15% 46.25% 47.52%
3 33.0% 46.74% 48.94% 50.79%
4 36.8% 53.02% 55.66% 57.11%
5 26.3% 55.36% 62.63% 63.32%
6 26.5% 44.54% 45.02% 45.52%
7 59.3% 70.86% 75.12% 78.80%
8 55.7% 77.75% 78.73% 81.36%
9 40.8% 57.88% 57.88% 57.88%
10 37.8% 67.13% 71.49% 80.23%
11 53.0% 75.61% 76.68% 77.10%
12 30.5% 46.25% 49.18% 50.38%
13 52.6% 86.66% 87.35% 89.16%
14 36.5% 75.31% 75.59% 76.27%
15 46.8% 67.69% 68.26% 68.83%
16 30.3% 48.58% 53.20% 60.44%
17 19.7% 34.27% 36.00% 52.25%
State 37.2% 58.38% 60.49% 64.03%
Green indicates 5% or higher increase from 4/17/09.
56
FIRST BASE50%
HOME80%+
SECOND BASE60%
THIRD BASE70%
EVERY CHILD EVERY MONTH80% BY JULY
2009!
State
64%
R2
47%
R157%
R1752%
R351%
R457%
R5
63%
R6
45%
R7 79%
ALREADY HOME R8 (81%); R10 (80%); &
R13 (89%)!
R9 58%
R11 77%
R1250%
R14 76%
R15
69%
R16
60%
57
REGION Number %
1 24 4.2%
2 29 5.0%
3 34 5.9%
4 44 7.6%
5 32 5.5%
6 45 7.8%
7 16 2.8%
8 18 3.1%
9 16 2.8%
10 21 3.6%
11 35 6.1%
12 38 6.6%
13 80 13.9%
14 31 5.4%
15 39 6.8%
16 24 4.2%
17 51 8.8%
Total 577 100.0%
NUMBER & PERCENT OF CHILDEN AGING OUT OF CARE July 2008 – March 2009
58
TIMELINE TO AGING OUT FOR CHILDREN WITH APPLA GOAL (N=978)
<6 m 6 to 12 m 12 to 18 m 18 to 24 m >24 m
212 174 147 112 333
21.7% 17.8% 15.0% 11.5% 34.0%
There are a 978 children in care with Another Planned Permanent Living Arrangement as a goal. Of those, 21.7% will be 18 years of age in less than 6 months.
59
Region APPLA Children <6 m 6 to 12 m 12 to 18 m 18 to 24 m >24 m
1 69 9 17 12 6 25
2 33 11 4 1 4 13
3 83 20 12 12 5 34
4 83 17 10 17 12 27
5 54 13 12 6 7 16
6 83 22 10 15 10 26
7 30 6 7 5 5 7
8 32 4 8 7 3 10
9 34 10 2 7 5 10
10 44 5 12 2 8 17
11 34 16 3 5 4 6
12 100 12 13 14 12 49
13 73 15 15 10 6 27
14 85 16 18 14 10 27
15 44 12 6 8 2 16
16 41 14 7 4 8 8
17 56 10 18 8 5 15
Total 978 212 174 147 112 333
TIMELINE TO AGING OUT FOR CHILDREN WITH APPLA GOAL BY REGION
60
COUNTY DIRECTOR REVIEW RESULTSMarch 2009
61
COMPARISON OF PEAS & COUNTY DIRECTOR REVIEWS
Note: PEAS data based on review period January 2008 through December 2008 while Field Operations Review Guide for March 2009.
62
TARGETING FAMILY ENGAGEMENTOctober 2008 & March 2009 Reviews
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73