Get documents about "Op Ed Template
Description
Op Ed Template document sample
Document Sample
WELCOME
Eighth Task Force Meeting
February 23, 2009
www.michigan.gov/CWITF
1
Task Force Learning & Action Plan
May 19
2008 Task Force charge, orientation, and MI child welfare policy
July – Aug Developing child welfare system values, and policy and program review.
2008 Jul 21- Lansing: Michigan juvenile justice program review, children’s rights litigation settlement, child welfare values
Aug 18 – Detroit: Family & children’s services review, Michigan child welfare (abuse & neglect) program review
Sep / Jan Identify child welfare strengths, issues, and options as the basis for outcome recommendations; convene Task
2008 – Force workgroups.
Jan 2009 Sep 22 - Detroit: Work group preliminary findings, child welfare values development
Oct 20 – Lansing: Cross-cutting issues and promising practices, workgroup preliminary findings
Nov 17 - Detroit: Task Force Values Decision, Parents Panel , Work Group Recommendations (2nd Iteration)
Jan 26 – Detroit: Young Adult Panel, Settlement Presentation, , Work Group Recommendations (2nd Iteration)
Feb – March Reach Consensus Regarding Recommendations and Report
2009 Feb 23 - Lansing: Native American Panel, Race Equity Report , Communications Recommendations, Review
and discuss preliminary Task Force report
March - Detroit: Final review and approach of Task Force report
April 2009 Present Task Force Report
2
Eighth Task Force Meeting
February 23, 2009
Meeting Purpose:
• Race Equity Report Findings
• Native American Panel
• Communications Committee Report
• Synthesis Committee Report
3
Meeting Agenda
9:00 Registration and coffee
9:30 Welcome and announcements
10:00 Michigan race equity report presentation
11:00 Native American panel discussion
12:00 Communications committee presentation
12:30 Lunch
1:00 Synthesis committee status report
3:45 Public comment
4:00 Adjournment
4
Michigan Race Equity
Review
February
23, 2009
Michigan Analysis
Focus of the Analysis: How does it come
about that, after substantiation of neglect,
African-American children are more likely to
be removed from their homes?
Components of the Analysis
Quality Service Review
Praxis Institutional Analysis
Quality Service Review (QSR)
The Quality Service Review (QSR) is a case-
based methodology of looking at practice and
systems.
The QSR process relies on the input of
frontline practitioners, family members, and
service providers to evaluate a service
system’s ability to respond to a child and
family's individual and unique presenting
needs.
QSR Informants
DHS staff
Parent’s and children’s services providers
Parents and youth
Other family members
Spoke with and observed younger children
The Institutional Analysis is:
A community-based
systematic method of
analyzing how certain
features (i.e., safety,
accountability, race equity)
are or are not incorporated
into practitioners’ daily work
routines and the policies of
their agencies.
What Determines a Worker’s
Actions?
Policies, rules, regulations
Administrative procedures & protocols
Allocation of resources
Systems of oversight & supervision
Job descriptions, agency mission, purpose and
function
Education, training, skill development
Linkages to previous, subsequent, & parallel
interveners
Concepts and theories
Institutional Analysis
Focus of the Analysis
Examination of the front end of the system
Reports
Risk assessment
Service planning
Initial system contact
Data collection—by 30 person team in Saginaw, 45 in
Wayne
Interviews
Case readings
Observations
Focus groups
Summary of Activities for
Institutional Analysis
Type of Activity Saginaw Wayne County
Interviews 50 106
Observations Hotline, investigations, Hotline, investigations, Team
Team Decision Making (TDM) Decision Making (TDM) meetings,
meetings, family court family court, juvenile detention
Focus Groups Birth parents, youth, and foster parents Birth parents, youth, foster parents,
Assistant Attorneys General,
protective services specialists,
protective services supervisors, and
TDM meetings facilitators
Review of Case Files 40 20
child protective cases 16 child protective cases
and 4 children simultaneously
involved with the child protective
and the juvenile justice systems
General Findings
1. African American families do not receive necessary supports that
could prevent or divert their involvement with the child protective
system. African Americans families and youth often experience
the services offered to them by DHS as irrelevant, difficult to
access, or inadequate to support and strengthen their families.
2. African American families experience child welfare systems as
intrusive interventions that do not fairly assess and appreciate
their unique strengths and weaknesses and fail to adequately
explore the least restrictive placement options for children.
General Findings
3. African American youth and families are negatively
characterized or labeled by workers in the child welfare system.
Some of these labels follow them through their interactions with
various new workers and ultimately negatively affect the
outcome of their case.
4. Advocacy on behalf of African American families and
children is insufficient in helping them participate in, challenge,
and negotiate the child protection system.
5. Inadequate mechanisms exist for African American parents
and youth to hold DHS, providers, and advocates accountable
for equitable treatment and quality services.
Dual Ward Findings
1. Lack of policy to guide coordination
between the child protection system and the
juvenile justice system results in conflicting
practice with youth.
2. Lack of engagement of dual wards by those
responsible for their care.
3. Uncoordinated approach to psychotropic
medications potentially creating significant
risk for youth.
Dual Ward Findings
continued...
4. Punitively responding to youth in foster care
when behavior is ―normal‖ or when
therapeutic interventions are required.
5. Decision-making by the courts for dual
wards.
Overall Recommendations
1. DHS must build the internal leadership
capacity to ensure that the Department
functions in an equitable, fair, and
responsive manner.
2. DHS must use relevant and reliable data
drive management for racial equity.
3. DHS must clearly articulate and implement
a case practice model which translates
DHS’ philosophy into policies and practices.
Overall Recommendations
cont...
4. DHS must correct policy misinterpretations
that disadvantage children and families of
color. Further, DHS must build the capacity
to regularly evaluate the fairness and equity
of their policies.
5. DHS’ risk assessment tool must be further
examined and its implementation improved.
6. Resource providers that contract with DHS
must provide fair and equitable services.
Overall Recommendations
cont...
7. DHS must build external partnerships in
working for equity.
8. DHS should collaborate with the courts to
improve the quality of legal oversight.
9. Michigan’s child welfare and juvenile justice
system leaders must work collaboratively to
explore policies and practices which meet
the specific needs of dual ward youth.
DUAL WARD YOUTH
Recommendations
Accurate data on dual wards need to be available
for planning and service purposes.
Joint case planning conferences should be
implemented immediately.
Law enforcement protocols for bringing youth into
custody need to be modified.
Further qualitative study needs to be conducted to
examine: coordination of services and legal
proceedings, management of psychotropic
medication, conflicting system policies, effective
advocacy
Native American Panel Discussion
21
Focus Group Participants
• Juantia Bye, Sault Ste. Marie Tribe Chippewa Indians
• Kathleen McKee, Pokagon Band Potawatomi
• Mellissa Megeshick, Lac Vieux Desert Chippewa
• Bill Memberto, Little River Band of Ottawa Indians
• Melissa Van Luven, Sault Ste. Marie Tribe Chippewa
Indians
22
Native American Focus Group: Major Themes
1. Tribes involved as critical decision maker and critical
stakeholder.
2. Timely assessments.
3. Enact Michigan Indian Child Welfare Act.
4. Designate ICWA staff.
5. Fully utilize Bureau of Indian Affairs funding.
6. Report number of Natives on central registry.
7. Include issues related to Sovereignty in training curriculum.
8. Use Gogebic county as an example of best practice;
partnerships between DHS and the tribes are very positive in
this region. 23
Panel Participants
• Juniata Bye, Sault Ste. Marie
• Kathleen McKee, Pokagon Tribe
• Christine McPherson, Casey Foundation
• Bill Memberto, Little River Band of Ottawa Indians
• Silvia Murray, Saginaw Chippewa Tribe
24
Panel Discussion
1. What can the state and other stakeholders do to
help address these issues?
2. What are the current barriers that have
prohibited progress in these areas?
25
Young Adult Panel Discussion
26
Communications committee
• The work of the Michigan Child Welfare
Improvement Task Force can be best
sustained through:
• Broad dissemination of the report
• A high-profile media campaign driving
people to a robust web site.
• Sustained engagement with the public,
media and elected officials.
Raise Me Up
Casey Family Programs
Raisemeup.org
Raise Me Up!
• Build public will
• Encourage people to help
• Educate public
• Call people to action
Paid media campaign
• TV, radio, billboards,
posters, bus stop ads
• In Austin, 95% of
people heard message
24 or more times.
• Spanish translation
for Latino
community
Earned media
News organizations gave
the campaign
substantial coverage,
helping drive people to
the web site. One
station ran series during
“Sweeps Week.”
Earned media
• Newspapers, TV Valvree Kerr was 55 years
and radio covered old when she first explored
the campaign fostering. Her own kids now
grown, and she and her
• StoryCorps husband were left with an
chronicled stories of empty nest. But that all
families for public changed the day Antoinette
Mimes and her two sisters
radio. arrived unexpectedly to join
the family. Ten years later,
both women describe how
their lives changed the day
they met.
Raisemeup.org
• Links to select local agencies
• Links to public engagement (registering to
vote, contacting elected officials, local
media)
• Highlights upcoming events
• Provides facts and data about the system
Local partners
• Identified several local partners with direct
connection to the child welfare system
• Partners trained staff and reported
substantial response in public calling to
help.
• Other organizations are requesting to
become partners.
Director support
• DHS Director Ismael Ahmed has been
briefed and believes a program like Raise
Me Up is vital to building public support for
helping vulnerable children in Michigan.
• He has asked a small work group to pursue
further discussions with Casey Family
officials.
Recommendation
• The “Raise Me Up!” Campaign is a best-
practice effort.
• The Michigan Department of Human
Services should seek to become a partner
with Casey Family Programs as it expands
to other states.
Funding
• Casey plans to add a small number of sites
in 2009.
• The expectation is that its partners will
provide some financial support.
Recommendation
The Department of Human Services
should work with the Michigan
philanthropic community to identify
private support for “Raise Me Up” in
Michigan.
Region
• Financial practicalities dictate that a
program such as “Raise Me Up” begin in a
single region of the state.
• Wayne County has the largest population of
children in the system.
Recommendation
The state should launch a media
campaign/web site in Wayne County
or the tri-county area in 2009.
DHS web site
• The DHS web site provides a wide range of
information about the child welfare system,
including foster care, adoption,
homelessness, and other children’s issues.
• The web site is too often difficult to
navigate.
Recommendation
• That the Department of Human Services
redesigns its web site to assist the public in
learning about the child welfare system.
• The DHS web site link to other web sites in
Michigan, such as Save Our Children
Coalition, and 211 to help families find
local services and other information.
Plans for release of report
• Preliminary article to be distributed in
newsletters and e-mails.
• Task force members are encouraged to use
them in publications.
Press conferences
• Detroit and Grand Rapids
• Contact key reporters in advance
• Provide local data
• Highlight youth on task force and local task
force members
Op-ed articles
• Communications committee will produce a
template.
• Task force members encouraged to submit
individualized articles and letters to the
editor to local media.
Editorial Boards
• Task force leaders will meet with editorial
boards of major newspapers to build
support for the recommendations.
• Task force members are encouraged to take
similar action in their own communities.
Other earned media
• Contact local media in your area to
emphasize the importance of the report and
the impact in the community.
Internal newsletters
• Pre-release article is available for
newsletters and e-mails now.
• Task force members’ newsletters, emails,
etc. are an effective tool for disseminating
the report and building support for
recommendations.
Forums
• Task force members should consider
holding forums (and inviting lawmakers) in
their communities to discuss the issues and
the recommendations of the task force.
Recommendation
• The Department of Human Services should
work with task force leaders and members
should hold forums in their communities to
build public will for the recommendations
and sustain support.
LUNCH
51
SYNTHESIS COMMITTEE STATUS REPORT
52
Process for discussion
• Review change priorities
• State specific issue/rationale for selecting the change
priority
• Review the concise recommendations
• Review expected results
• Open floor for comments or clarifications
Change Priority #1: Increase the engagement
and voice of clients, birth parents, families and
tribes as decision-makers/partners in case
planning, program/policy development and
systemic change efforts.
Change Priority #2: Planning and provision of
service is guided by a timely comprehensive
screening and assessment of the child and
family and their needs.
Change Priority #3: Foster a seamless approach
to service delivery through cross systems
collaboration and community partnerships to
improve the conditions of vulnerable children
and families.
Change Priority #4: Funding will be used more
flexibly to achieve the structural system and
service reforms.
Change Priority #5: Strategic use of data and
reporting to analyze and manage the system.
Change Priority #6: Opportunities for training
and workforce development should be
provided to ensure that judicial and
public/private providers have adequate skills
and competencies to effectively perform their
job duties.
Change Priority #7: Racial and cultural equity to
become a priority for the child welfare system.
Change Priority #8: A seamless array of services
is provided with no wrong door for accessing
services.
PUBLIC COMMENT & REFLECTION
62
Schedule to Complete Report
• 2/23 8th Task Force Meeting
– Facilitated Task Force discussion on action plans
– Comments during meeting will be recorded for follow-up
– Task Force members requested to submit revisions to work plans in writing
to PPA by March 2nd at pelam@publicpolicy.com
• 3/6 – 3/9 Draft report reviewed by Task Force co-chairs and steering
committee
• 3/12 Task Force Report mailed to members
63
Schedule to Complete Report
• 3/16 9th Task Force meeting
– Action on Task Force report.
– Task Force Consensus protocol will be followed.
– Task Force members requested to submit amendments to recommendations
and key action steps in writing.
– Electronic voting.
• 3/25 Task Force Report mailed to members for review
• 3/26 – 4/1
– Task Force members may submit written notice of reservations concerning
specific recommendations and/or key action steps at
pelam@publicpolicy.com
– TBD Task Force report presented to Director Ahmed.
64
Next Meeting
• Monday, March 16th, 2009
• YouthVille
7375 Woodward, Suite 2800
Detroit, MI 48202
• Meeting Purpose
– Final review of task force report
65
