Keeping Children Safely Reunited

1
Keeping Children Safely Reunited

• State Strategies for Reducing or Maintaining
  Foster Care Re-entry Rates
• Preventing re-entry into Care
• Kentucky and Virginia Experiences

2
Presenters

• Kentucky
• James Grace, PIP Coordinator and
• Ruth A. Huebner, PhD Child Welfare Researcher
• Virginia
• Lynette Isbell, PIP Coordinator
• Therese Wolf, MA, Foster Care Manager

3
Objectives

• Discuss reentry rates in light of reunification.
• Demonstrate how data guided the PIP process.
• Show how state, regional and local teams used the
  data.
• Describe state and local strategies for change.
• Display changes on outcomes.

4
Foster Care Re-Entry 2001-2005
National Standard 8.6
5
Percent Reunified lt12 months2001-2005
National Standard 76.2
6
Kentucky Reentry Into Foster Care First 4 PIP
Quarters
7
Knowledge Building Where did children exit to
prior to re-entry?
Re-enter for school
8
Knowledge Building What predicts reentry to
care?

• Examined predictors of re-entry into foster care
  (with 12 months and anytime) using logistic
  regression.
• Children re-entering care in 12 months were more
  homogeneous then children re-entering anytime.
• Age at first entry was the strongest predictor of
  re-entry within 12 months.

9
Which children are most likely to go home and
return to foster care?
10
How Much Time in Care protects against re-entry?
11
When are children and families most vulnerable
after reunification?
12
Using Knowledge in Practice

• Children entering care at different ages have
  different risks of reentry gtlt 10 yrs.
• Children and families need some time in care to
  heal before reunification.
• Children and families are most vulnerable within
  the first 4-6 months

• Break the whole into two groups and address
  issues in each group.
• Work with courts using the data to show the risks
  and opportunities.
• Redirect family preservation funds to the
  reunification side
• Family Team Meetings at Exit for 54 of cases

13
Building Knowledge Case Work Quality Practices
14
Item 6 Practices used to maintain stability of
foster placement

• Preventing disruption in foster care most related
  to keeping child safe at home.
• documenting child strengths in assessment,
• regular consultations with the supervisor on
  placement,
• visits to the parents and foster parents that
  focus on pertinent issues,
• assessing and providing services for caretaker
  (foster parent) needs.

15
Harnessing the Change CatalystCQI Process

• Knowledge dissemination to PIP leads and CQI
  specialists in every service region phone
  calls, presentations, in person visits and
  presentations, email.
• Created separate report for each region of their
  data.
• Sent them the names and profile of every child
  with a reentry.
• Asked for an action plan.
• Grouped reentry as a safety issue evaluate
  lethality factors.

16
Example of Service Region Data
17
Working with our Private ProvidersDispelling
Misunderstandings
Children from state agency homes reenter care to
Private Agencies (Its not our problem)
18
Results Reduced Re-entry by Age Group
19
Result Reduce re-entry for All
87 more children this year
20
Kentucky Nurturing Youth
21
Virginia Creating a Safe Harbor for Children
22
VIRGINIA working to

• Heighten awareness of strengths and areas needing
  improvement using data measures for each locality
  on national standards
• Implement best practices to improve performance
• Keep low reentry rate while improving
  reunification rates
• Emphasize Family Prevention and Stabilization

23
Information about Virginia

• As of May 2006
• State supervised, locally administered 120
  local agencies
• Approved PIP for 15 months
• Re-entry rate 4.8
• Re-entry rate remains stable throughout PIP
  period
• Re-unification rate 70.20
• First time States performance for reunification
  is moving closer to PIP goal of 73.21 since
  beginning of PIP.

24
Data Reports, Trends and Use of Data to Improve
Performance

• State Office publishes a quarterly Progress to
  Excellence Report containing local agency
  performance on each of the six national
  Standards. Current trends related to re-entry and
  re-unification
• Urban localities with low re-entry rates also
  have lowest reunification rates
• Of nine urban areas, only 2 had reunification
  rates over the national average
• Of nine urban areas, only one is above the
  national standard for re-entry.
• Suburban or rural areas with low re-entry rates
  have reunification rates at or above the national
  standard
• Local agency data indicates that performance on
  the Re-entry measure is lower in rural areas or
  where there are less available resources to
  provide services

25
Data Reports, Trends and Use of Data to Improve
Performance

• Virginia conducts Quality Assurance Reviews
  annually on each agency, using the CFSR
  instrument and sends the report to the agency,
  state staff and regionally based Foster Care and
  Adoption Specialists.
• The Specialists review the Progress to
  Excellence and QA reports with each agency and
  discuss options for improving performance.
• The State provides support for implementing best
  practices to address performance problems.

26
Re-entry Rates in Virginia by Agencies
22
27
Virginia Agencies Meeting National Reunification
Standards
28
Virginia Reunification Rates Have Leveled and
are Showing improvement
29
Best practices Agencies Achieving National
Standards
30
Pilot Agencies Team with Parents to Avoid Re-Entry

• Structured Decision-Making
• Concurrent Permanency Planning
• Best-Practice Courts
• Structured family meetings
• Frequent visitation
• Alternatives to residential placement and
  long-term foster care

31
What we know about these agencies

• All are pilots in at least one best practice
• The length of stay in foster care for these
  agencies is 17.77 months compared to state rate
  of 19 months.
• Removal episodes are less than one half of the
  statewide rate
• Placement stability rate is only marginally lower
  than the statewide average

32
Practices after Reunification Affecting Re-entry

• Before returning custody Judges send children
  home on trial visit for up to 6 months and local
  office maintains custody
• After children are returned home and custody is
  returned the agency provides aftercare services.
  The provision of ongoing aftercare services is in
  policy, referenced in court orders, and standard
  local office practice
• The provision of ongoing aftercare services once
  custody is returned results in the agency or
  provider maintaining contact in the home during
  this critical period
• The provision of aftercare services fluctuates by
  locality and is dependent on resource
  availability
• Utilization of Promoting Safe and Stable Family
  Funds and State funds to fund aftercare services

33
Questions and Next Steps

• Further analysis of impact of agency case
  management and organizational best practices
• Develop clear picture of best practices operating
  at each agency and relationship to outcomes
• Quality Assurance process results effect of
  Regional Specialists work with each agency
• Understanding the relationship between court
  practices, other stakeholders involvement and
  child welfare outcomes
• Development of mentoring partnerships between
  agencies
• Developing and realigning resources to not lose
  ground
• Factors related to socioeconomic characteristics
• In depth analysis of re-entry data in relation to
  all outcomes.

34
Percent Reunified lt12 months2001-2005
National Standard 76.2
35
Foster Care Re-Entry 2001-2005
National Standard 8.6
36
PIP . . . A beginning, not just an event
Keep a Collective Eye on the Prize