Get documents about "Pups Pave the Way for FAR
Shared by: dffhrtcv3
-
Stats
- views:
- 7
- posted:
- 11/28/2011
- language:
- English
- pages:
- 5
Document Sample
New York Family Assessment Response (FAR) Quarterly
Vol. 2, No. 1
Pups Pave the Way for FAR
Marcia Young, Administrator, family members in the home were,
Child and Family Services, to use a technical term, “freaking
Monroe County Department of out.” The workers, armed with their
Human Services recently acquired skills in family
engagement, went head-on into the
Monroe County received a report
home to find out what all the fuss was
from an outlying town. The family
about. One family member managed
had numerous previous reports,
to communicate that the family dog
and had not exactly welcomed the
was having a litter of puppies at that
previous workers in the home. The
very moment. The grandmother was
new report included concerns of
chasing the dog around in an attempt
inadequate guardianship regarding
to have her deliver the puppies in
marijuana use in the home. After
one place instead of all over the
several failed attempts to contact the
house, and was finding it to be quite a
family, two workers took the 32-mile
challenge.
journey out to the country to meet
with the family and tell them about As it happens, the assigned
Governor David A. Paterson the options for response, including caseworker had previous experience
FAR. delivering puppies (she formerly
Commissioner Gladys Carrión, Esq.
questioned whether it was a good
Upon arrival, the workers found that
idea to put this experience on
the children were in school and the
her resume) and she shared this
information with the family. As soon
as the grandmother heard this, she
knew it was divine intervention and
motioned for the worker to get in
there and help her out. This newly
trained FAR worker rolled up her
sleeves and guided grandma through
the delivery process. At some point
during the process (there must have
been a lull in the conversation), the
worker was able to explain FAR, and
grandma, elbow-deep in puppies,
said she would like to participate in
this process.
An appointment was scheduled for
the workers to return when the
whole family would be there.
The workers called back later
to check on the puppies. The
report is that the new mother
and puppies are doing well. The
caseworkers are a big hit with the
family, the children are safe and
the case remains open. Yes indeed,
engagement was achieved.
1 www.AmericanHumane.org
New York FAR Quarterly Vol. 2, No. 1
Raising the FLAG spring, 2009, that some were having
difficulty completing the FAST (it had
As with most functional assessment
instruments, the FLAG is not
Michelle Rafael, Senior Policy Analyst 41 assessment areas with separate designed as a checklist to be read to
Joanne Ruppel, M.A., Research Scientist assessments for each parent and the parents or children, but as a way
III, FAR Program Evaluator each child in the family). Another for workers to consistently record
option was sought. A committee at the outcomes of a comprehensive
As our program name, Family OCFS, with significant county input, assessment process that includes
Assessment Response, indicates and adapted and shortened the FAST to discussions with family members
our enabling legislation requires, an better meet the collective needs of and other sources of information
assessment of each family is vital to users. The tool is designed to record as appropriate. FAR workers may
comprehensively addressing family family strengths and needs on 23 provide family members with a copy
needs, identifying family strengths to questions in four general areas (The of the FLAG instrument and use it as
support those needs and responding Family Together, Caregivers’ Status, a conversation starter, reference or
in a way that meets those needs. Children’s Status and Caregiver discussion guide. They may also use
Advocacy Status). other approaches and tools they find
When we began pre-implementation helpful in conducting comprehensive
planning with Round 1 counties, Like the FAST, there are four detailed assessments tailored to each family. If
we reviewed several assessment answer options for each question, workers do not share the FLAG with
instruments used by other states which range from a clear strength to families, they can use the FLAG items
(Hawaii, Minnesota, North Carolina) a need for immediate or intensive as a reminder to themselves to assess
and even other countries (Ireland, service action. In some critical areas, all key areas listed. As each family is
New Zealand). The Round 1 counties such as mental health or substance unique, there may be other strengths
worked together to determine the abuse, the answer choices now or needs that the worker and family
best fit for them and they even held explicitly address the family’s current discuss, but an assessment of the
a rare face-to-face meeting to review use of services, which the FAST did areas on the FLAG instrument is
and discuss available tools. An almost not do. The tool became different considered the minimum that needs
unanimous decision was reached enough from the original to merit its to be done for each family on the FAR
to use the Family Advocacy and own name: Family-Led Assessment track.
Support Tool (FAST), an adaptation Guide (FLAG), a name that captures
of a series of outcome management the engagement spirit — a hallmark
tools collectively known as the Child of our FAR approach.
and Adolescent Needs and Strengths
Assessment, originally developed
by John S. Lyons, Ph.D., for the child Q: Is OCFS writing guidelines for FAR
mental health population and later documentation in Connections?
expanded with additional sections for A: Great question! When the case review was being
the child welfare and juvenile justice completed in December, we all realized that some
populations.
guidelines for what to include in the record would
In the spirit of learning and evolving be very helpful. FAR supervisor Faith Aprilante
as we go, OCFS allowed a tryout from Orange County is chairing such an effort to use
period of approximately six months the expertise of many current FAR supervisors to create
once counties began FAR practice.
a helpful document. Stay tuned for the results, due out
Even after Tompkins County modified
the FAST language to be more family- before the next newsletter.
friendly, it became evident by late If you have a question you’d like addressed, please send it to larab@americanhumane.org.
2 www.AmericanHumane.org
New York FAR Quarterly Vol. 2, No. 1
Creating a Favorable Buzz About Our Work With Families
Kerron Norman, Director of Child familiar with some of the dimensions reached out to the press to cover
Welfare, Westchester County Department of this response. This familiarity also the schools’ success story. The press
of Social Services created a favorable buzz about our in turn reached out to WCDSS and
new way of engaging families. some of the partners for our input,
How did the Westchester County
which resulted in a second article.
Department of Social Services get Roughly six months subsequent We later collaborated with the Vera
favorable press on family assessment to launching the FAR model, we Institute of Justice, which produced a
response? Timing combined with decided to celebrate the successes comprehensive document that speaks
strategy. of the families we’d worked with. well of Yonkers’ dedication and
We were inspired by three things: response to truancy.
Since early 2007, WCDSS Child
an 18.6 percent improvement in
Welfare Services has participated in a
school attendance over a two-year In short, good news and good will are
multidisciplinary Truancy Reduction
period since the start of the Yonkers worth announcing.
Task Force. This collaboration started
Truancy Reduction Taskforce; a desire
from a shared concern about the high
to support the Graham Windham
rate of truancy in Yonkers. It involves
foster care agency’s Graham Youth
the Yonkers Board of Education, the
Development Program, which trains
probation and police departments,
youths for careers in the catering
the district attorney’s office, Student
industry and other fields; and the
Advocacy and other community
Governor’s proclamation that 2009
service providers. In alignment
was the Year of the Caseworker.
with this focus, Yonkers piloted
an educational neglect unit in the As we planned our celebration, we
child protective services program to began to recognize that we were
respond to the majority of truancy- in a good place to announce to the
related allegations. The following year, Westchester County community
when OCFS initiated the FAR model, this “feel good, done good” news
we saw it as a natural progression for story about our child welfare work.
our work with educational neglect We consulted with the county’s
cases. first deputy commissioner and the
communications director about
We announced our plans to the task
our celebration plans and received
force and answered their questions.
a favorable response to releasing
We educated our partners on Social
the story to the press. The press and
Services Law 427-a, which addresses
the community responded quite
the legality of a differential response,
positively.
and referenced the OCFS website for
additional review. Extremely helpful The school district also received
to us was that several years ago, a favorable community response
WCDSS piloted a differential response to FAR and the truancy reduction
approach, so the partners were strategies. The school superintendent
Helpful Resources
From the American Humane Association:
• A Social Worker’s Tool Kit for Working with Immigrant Families,
which includes A Child Welfare Flow Chart and Immigration
Status and Relief Options: Download a copy at
www.americanhumane.org/migrationtoolkits
• Guidelines for Family Group Decision Making in Child Welfare:
Download a copy at www.fgdm.org
• The Quality Improvement Center on Differential Response in
Child Protective Services: www.differentialresponseqic.org
3 www.AmericanHumane.org
New York FAR Quarterly Vol. 2, No. 1
FAR Quality Assurance Case Review
Gail Haulenbeek, OCFS, and other states are doing for quality ◦ Case activity consistent with
Faith Aprilante, Orange County FAR assurance but nothing met our FAR model is documented in
Project Coordinator and Case Supervisor needs. As a group, the Round 1 progress notes
counties and OCFS decided that the ◦ Appropriate use of informal
What is “typical” FAR practice?
development of quality assurance services and family support
How do supervisors, managers,
tools was needed and that it would be network
administrators and OCFS know what
beneficial to everyone to get a better
FAR practice looks like with families? ◦ Case closings or openings for
understanding of what we could learn
How do we know if FAR case practices formal preventive services that
about FAR case practice by a review of
and services are providing for are within county-targeted
casework records.
children’s safety and building families’ time frames and appropriate
capacities to care for their children? To get started on the development of to case circumstances
a first-generation quality assurance
These questions have been raised • Practice fidelity
process and tool set, OCFS invited the
by FAR counties and OCFS during
FAR counties to have a representative ◦ How well/clearly are
conference calls and at the FAR
participate in a conference call to caseworkers explaining the
symposium. As FAR has grown from
develop the requirements for a review two options?
an idea into a significant portion
tool and process. The group agreed
of some districts’ child protection ◦ How well are caseworkers
that the following dimensions of
response systems, we have all begun explaining the issues of
FAR practice needed to be examined
to expand our focus from startup to concern and engaging
through a case review:
continuous quality improvement. all family members in a
Now that we know what FAR is and • Model fidelity discussion of their views
have developed our implementation of those issues and other
knowledge and skill set, the time ◦ Case track assignment in line concerns of the family?
has come for us to ask ourselves, “so with county criteria
how are we doing?” The future of ◦ First contact: timely call, ◦ How thoroughly are workers
FAR in New York will be determined appointment setup versus exploring/eliciting each
in part by what we learn now about unannounced visit family’s strengths and
the quality and effectiveness of FAR potential solutions to
◦ Safety: accurate and timely identified issues?
practices, so knowing as much as we initial and ongoing assessment
can about how FAR is being practiced ◦ Are strengths-based and
is very important to all of us. ◦ Re-reporting when danger is solution-focused techniques
identified and/or family not being used?
The Needs and Requirements cooperating with FAR after FAR
track was chosen ◦ Is there sufficiency/
We agreed that we need a quality adequacy of engagement and
◦ Assessments of safety and information gathering on areas
assurance process for FAR. Our
family strengths and needs of family functioning that
tools for assessing the provision
(FLAG or other approved impact child safety and well
of traditional CPS investigation
assessment tool) are consistent being?
and assessment clearly would
with case circumstances and
not meet the need. OCFS asked ◦ Are families being supported
documented
American Humane to identify what to make decisions regarding
what actions, supports or
services might be needed?
◦ Do the services or solutions
fit the family’s needs and
reduce the likelihood that
maltreatment will occur?
◦ Is the level of casework
contacts and efforts
commensurate with family
strengths and needs?
(Continued on page 5)
Training Participants, Livingston and Yates Process & Practice Training, April 6-7, 2010
4 www.AmericanHumane.org
New York FAR Quarterly Vol. 2, No. 1
(Continued from page 4) regarding answers to all of the review The report was shared with the
questions. counties early in February. Individual
◦ What is the quality of decision debriefing conference calls were set
making on closing the case The Review up so that each county could discuss
or opening it for preventive its findings with OCFS and American
services, including a warm During the week of Dec. 7, 2009, three Humane. The findings were mixed;
handoff? 3-person review teams met at OCFS some strengths and a number of
to review 94 cases, with roughly equal practice soft spots were identified.
◦ What is the quality of
numbers of cases from each of the six Like everything else related to FAR, it
supervision in guiding staff
Round 1 counties. Reviewers included was a great learning experience. We
members’ work with families,
Faith Aprilante from Orange County, expect that the review will launch a
in coaching their engagement
Steve Grome from Onondaga County lot of discussion, self-assessment and
and interviewing skills
and Gina Newlin from Tompkins more work to develop useful tools for
with families and in setting
County; Lara Bruce, Debra Gilmore the counties and OCFS to assess and
expectations for the quality of
and Lauren Morley from American promote quality FAR practice.
the FAR process?
Humane; and Margaret Coombs,
Based on this agreement, OCFS Sonoma Pelton and Karen Sessions,
staff developed a draft case review professional development program
tool and process in consultation associates from the regional offices.
with American Humane and the Each case was reviewed by all three
Round 1 counties. It was important review team members and one
to everyone that all the perspectives review consensus was reached. The
of those of us involved in FAR be process was challenging, as at this
represented in the review. In order to point in the evolution of FAR in New
do that, a process was developed in York, no specific standards for case
which a 3-person team, comprising documentation had been developed;
a representative from American thus, documentation varied widely.
Humane, an OCFS Regional Office
American Humane developed a
staff person involved in FAR
report on the findings and worked
implementation and a county FAR
with the reviewers to be sure that the
supervisor or worker, would review
findings were accurately represented.
case records and come to consensus
tive:
rilan te shares her perspec
coordinator Faith Ap
FAR implementation t to each case by
e perspectives brough
a very inter esting experience. Th scussion about FAR
practices
Participating in this case review was r quite thoughtful di
ict reviewers made fo s. Many of the large
themes gleaned
OCFS and local distr
American Humane, nt do cumentation method d not find surprising
es through our curre reviewed, which I di
and how that translat t among each of the districts the documentation
of the
from this expe rience were consisten dantly clear throug h this process is that
g. What became abun documentation to be
ture in order for the
but did find reassurin ilies needs more struc ality assurance, I
aking with our FAR fam ue to the nature of qu
great efforts we are m flecti on of our practice. Tr ate our practice as we
ll
clear and accurate re ourselves and evalu
useful and present a lpin g us “check in” with collaborate in
was quite useful in he stricts have agreed to
feel that this review w, many of the FAR di e guidelines will help
what reso nated from the revie It is hoped that thes
as our needs. Using documentin g within a FAR case. d at the same time wo
rk to
idelines to follow in their case records an
developing gu arly demonstrated in
that their work is cle
our FAR staff ensure
actice. ross the state
improve casework pr l work being done ac
such great, cre ative and thoughtfu
view is that there is is innovative work!
What I saw in this re ocess only adds to th
to evaluate our pr
and that continuing
Write for Us! The American Humane Association
provides this newsletter to New York
Contact us with your ideas so we can counties currently implementing
get them into our schedule. We’ll feature
Family Assessment Response.
one story per issue. Please reply to Lara
Bruce at Larab@americanhumane.org.
5 www.AmericanHumane.org
