|
|
|
|
|
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
|
Inter-Departmental Correspondence
|
Human Services Agency
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 13, 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 5, 2004
|
|
|
TO:
|
Honorable Board of Supervisors
|
|
|
|
FROM:
|
Maureen D. Borland, Director, Human Services Agency
|
|
|
Mark Lane, Director of Children and Family Services
|
|
|
|
SUBJECT:
|
Approval of AB636 Child Welfare System Improvement Plan (SIP) for San Mateo County for October, 2004-September 2005.
|
|
|
Recommendation
|
Adopt a Resolution approving the AB636 Child Welfare System Improvement Plan (SIP) for San Mateo County for October, 2004-September, 2005.
|
|
|
Background
|
AB636 is the State legislation that created the State-mandated child welfare outcome and accountability system called the California Children and Family Services Review (C-CFSR). The C-CFSR mirrors the process the federal government uses to monitor and improve state child welfare systems. AB636 went into effect January 2004, and requires quarterly outcome data reports, a Self-Assessment, a System Improvement Plan and, in the future, will include a Peer Quality Case review.
|
|
|
The Child Welfare Services (CWS) Redesign Oversight Committee sets the direction for child welfare systems improvement in San Mateo County by assuring the C-CFSR and Child Welfare Services Redesign, the State’s two strategies for improving child welfare outcomes, are implemented in an integrated effort. The Oversight Committee members are leaders of organizations and other individuals who are partners mandated and recommended by the State to participate in planning and implementing the C-CFSR and Child Welfare Services Redesign. Committee membership includes: County Board of Supervisors (committee Co-Chair), County Manager, Health Department, County Mental Health Department, CWS Administrators, Managers, and Social Workers, Foster, Kin and Birth Parents, Foster Youth, local Education Agency, Probation Administrators, Supervisors, and Officers, Court Appointed Special Advocates, County Alcohol and Drug Department, Labor Union, Law Enforcement, local Representatives of Children and Parents, local Juvenile Court Bench Officers, District Attorney, County Counsel, Private Defender, County Children and Families Commission, County Welfare Department, Domestic Violence Prevention Provider, Economic Development Agency, local Child Abuse Prevention Council, local Workforce Investment Board, Local Public Housing Authority, Community-based Service Providers, Special Education Local Planning Area(s), Peninsula Community Foundation (Co-Chair).
|
|
|
In June 2004, San Mateo County completed our California Child and Family Services Review (AB636) Self-Assessment. The Self-Assessment included feedback from all members of the Redesign Oversight Committee, their staff, and other community partners. This Self-Assessment will help guide child welfare improvement planning efforts in San Mateo County for the next three years, and is intended to provide a comprehensive view of the County’s child welfare system. The Self-Assessment includes a description of the system as it stands today, and feedback on aspects of system operations that could be improved.
|
|
|
Upon reviewing the information contained in the Self-Assessment and the County’s quarterly data reports, the CWS Redesign Oversight Committee selected three priority focus areas for this year’s System Improvement Plan (SIP). The following priorities were selected based on the State’s mandate to effect system improvements that will result in child welfare outcomes meeting or exceeding State performance targets. CWS Redesign sets forth the practice principles that will be applied to this work. San Mateo County’s priority focus areas for child welfare system improvement planning and implementation activities are:
|
|
|
Safety Outcome 1: Children are, first and foremost, protected from abuse and neglect.
|
|
|
Systemic Factor E: Service Array
|
|
|
Goal 1: Design and pilot three paths of differential response to reports of child abuse and neglect.
|
|
|
Goal 2: Assure appropriate linkages to mental health assessment and mental health treatment services for children and families.
|
|
|
San Mateo County has a lower rate of substantiated referrals for child abuse and neglect than California State performance targets as a whole (5.1% San Mateo County compared to 11.5% California State performance target in 2003). In San Mateo County, about 95% of all families referred to the Children Protective Services (CPS) hotline are not formally engaged in change-oriented services at the end of a 30-day response period. This rate is higher than the estimated 92% California statewide average. This highlights a need to increase access to preventive and supportive services, particularly community-based resources for at-risk and vulnerable populations. Differential response, the cornerstone of CWS Redesign, is a strategy that supports Safety Outcome 1, that is, “Children are, first and foremost, protected from abuse and neglect.”
|
|
|
Permanence Outcome 3: Children have permanence and stability in their living situations without increasing entry into foster care.
|
|
|
Indicator 3F: Rate of Foster Care Re-Entry
|
|
|
Goal 1: Improve team-based case planning processes.
|
|
|
While San Mateo County has a higher percentage of children who are reunified with their families within one year than California state’s performance target as a whole (73.9% San Mateo County and 65.3% California state performance target), the percentage of children who re-enter care is slightly higher in San Mateo County than California state’s average (12.8% San Mateo County versus 10.8% California State average, January 2004 quarterly report). The Self-Assessment indicated a need to improve stability for children who return to their families and achieve an appropriate balance between reunification and reentry that reflects both the best interests of children and the community. Self Assessment partners recommended specific improvement strategies, including increasing family and community participation in case planning and assuring that resources continue to be available to support families after children return home.
|
|
|
Permanence Outcome 4: The family relationships and connections of children will be preserved as appropriate.
|
|
|
Indicator 4B: Placement in Least Restrictive Care Setting – Primary Placement
|
|
|
Goal 1: Improve supports for social workers, foster and kin parents, and birth parents to help keep youth in family care placements.
|
|
|
Goal 2: Maintain existing and recruit new foster, kin and adoptive homes.
|
|
|
The share of San Mateo County’s children in foster care who are adolescents (56.5%) is higher than the percent of adolescents in the California statewide caseload average (47% on July 1, 2003). This may help explain why, in San Mateo County, more children are placed in group homes than the State average (19% San Mateo County versus 9% California State average), and fewer are placed with relatives (26% San Mateo County versus 35% California State average, January 2004 quarterly report). Experience shows it is more difficult to recruit kin and foster (resource) families to care for adolescents and children with behavioral problems. In the Self-Assessment, resource parents recommended several strategies that can help improve recruitment and retention efforts, and community members highlighted the need to develop additional resources and supports for adolescents.
|
|
|
Discussion
|
The highest priority in San Mateo County’s SIP is assuring child safety. The Human Services Agency (HSA) and the Health Services Agency share in the commitment to this goal. In the coming year, staff from both agencies will assume joint responsibility for investigating all cases of reported child abuse and neglect involving children aged 0 – 5 years. Further, all families participating in CWS voluntary services and for whom child abuse has been substantiated will be referred for intensive treatment by a newly created multidisciplinary team staffed by the Health Services Agency. New protocols guiding shared responsibility for assuring child safety are the foundation of the three paths of service response (differential response) that San Mateo County will plan and pilot this year. Designing and implementing a system of differential response is intended to increase access to preventive and early interventions that can help families achieve safety, stability, and well-being before violent or abusive behavior becomes so severe it warrants filing dependency, delinquency and/or criminal judicial proceedings or initiating more intensive levels of child welfare systems intervention. It will also result in an expanded network of community-based services to support children’s safe and healthy development in their own families and communities.
|
|
|
In each of the three priority focus areas, the SIP incorporates specific recommendations for improvement outlined in the Self-Assessment, as well as best practice strategies promoted by state and foundation supported child welfare initiatives. The SIP is intended as a blueprint for action in focused areas rather than the only vehicle through which systems change will be accomplished in the coming year. Recommendations for improvement contained in the Self-Assessment will be forwarded to existing planning and policy groups to guide work already in progress.
|
|
|
Specific content in the SIP was developed in July 2004 and August 2004 by three design teams, one focused on each priority area identified for improvement. Each design team numbered 25-30 individuals, including members of the Redesign Oversight Committee and other mandated and recommended partners for Self-Assessment and SIP preparation.
|
|
|
Each design team met three times over the course of one month. The meetings began with an overview of the C-CFSR, San Mateo County outcomes data, the Self Assessment, the SIP planning processes, and CWS Redesign in an effort to provide education and background for the SIP planning process. Each design team developed the goals, strategies, milestones contained in the SIP and suggested timeframes and assignments of responsibility for completing the work. Recommendations from the design teams were reviewed and approved by both HSA’s internal committee of executives and child welfare program staff, and by the Redesign Oversight Committee. As the lead agency, HSA submits the proposed System Improvement Plan to the Board of Supervisors and respectfully requests the Board to adopt a Resolution approving the AB636 Child Welfare System Improvement Plan (SIP) for San Mateo County for October, 2004-September, 2005.
|
|
|
Resources needed to implement the SIP in FY 2004-05 are estimated at $1.4 million. Of this amount, $600,000 is funded through the State Child Welfare Services Redesign allocation. It is anticipated that AB 1612, if passed by the State, may provide some additional State CWS Redesign funding for FY 2004-05. Foundation funding will also be sought for one-time and other appropriate costs. There is no Net County Cost anticipated at this time.
|
|
|
County Counsel has reviewed this Resolution and has approved as to form.
|
|
|
Vision Alignment
|
The goals of the System Improvement Plan are consistent with the commitment to: Ensure basic health and safety for all. It aligns with goal number 6: Children grow up healthy in safe and supportive homes and neighborhoods and goal number 8: Help vulnerable people – the aged, disabled, mentally ill, at-risk youth and others – achieve a better quality for life. The System Improvement Plan contributes to this commitment and goals by providing a framework to plan and implement strategies that will eventually improve and expand the service delivery system, which includes working with our partners to build community capacity to further develop service interventions. In order to provide children and families the service delivery system needed to assure that at-risk children and youth have stable and safe homes, it will take a concerted effort by all community service providers to respond to the needs of our children and families. This System Improvement Plan is the preliminary step toward that end.
|
|
|
Fiscal Impact
|
There is no anticipated fiscal impact associated with approving the AB636 System Improvement Plan for San Mateo County.
|
|
|