improving the lives of children in long-term foster care: the role of texas’ courts & legal...
DESCRIPTION
Improving the Lives of Children in Long-Term Foster Care: The Role of Texas’ Courts & Legal System. Texas Appleseed Charge. To examine how long-term life outcomes for PMC children growing up in foster care can be improved. Judicial system, no previous review - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
IMPROVING THE LIVES OF CHILDREN IN LONG-TERM FOSTER CARE: THE ROLE OF TEXAS’ COURTS & LEGAL SYSTEM
Texas Appleseed Charge
To examine how long-term life outcomes for PMC children growing up in foster care can be improved.Judicial system, no previous reviewPermanent Managing Conservatorship (PMC)Must prevent children from aging out with no support system
Data Sources Qualitative
15 jurisdictions, covering 65% of foster children in PMC
Nearly 150 interviews Quantitative
DFPS data from 2005-2008
Children who Age Out Experience
Low education levels Poverty Unemployment Homelessness High incidence of health care issues Increased justice system involvement High rates of early pregnancy High rates of post-traumatic stress disorder
Challenges Facing Former Foster Care Children Without a high school diploma or GED: 24.4%
Completed higher education: 5.7%
Employed: 48%
Household incomes below the poverty line: 33.2%
One or more mental health disorders: 54%
Without health insurance: 33%
Ever arrested: 57.2%, since age 18: 38.7%
Homeless at some point in adult life: 22.2%
Rate of Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome: twice the rate of U.S. combat
veterans
According to the ChapinHall study (Mark E. Courtney et al, Midwest Evaluation of Adult Functioning of Former Foster Youth: Outcomes at Age 23 and 24, ChapinHall at the University of Chicago (2010)
The Path to Permanent Managing Conservatorship (PMC) Once a child is removed from the home DFPS is
appointed temporary managing conservator (TMC) by the court
DFPS provides “placement” while services are provided to the family
Within 12-18 months court must dismiss suit or declare DFPS permanent managing conservator (PMC)
PMC can be with or without termination of parental rights (TPR)
Permanent Managing Conservatorship (PMC)
DFPS becomes child’s permanent legal guardian
Permanency Plan Placement Review Hearings
Children and Youth Entering and Exiting PMC
Percentage of Children Entering PMC in FY 2008, by Age
12%
32%
18%
12%
9%
16%
<11 to 34 to 67 to 910 to 1213 to 17
0%
27%
20%
13%
9%
11%
21%
<11 to 34 to 67 to 910 to 1213 to 1718 to 21
Percentage of Children Exiting PMC in FY 2008, by Age at End of Year
Percentage of Children Exiting PMC in FY 2008, by Length of Time to Exit
37%
31%
13%
19%
<1 year1 year to <2 years2 years to <3 years3 years or longer
Percentage of Children Exiting PMC in FY 2008, by Outcome
64%
19%
2% 7%
7%
AdoptionAged OutOtherRelativesReunification
Length of Time to Exit Care by Exit Type for Children Who Exited in FY 2008
Adoption Relative Care Reunification Age Out0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
<1 year1-2 years2-3 years>3 years
Finding A Permanent Home
Percentage of Children Exiting PMC Through Adoption in FY 2008 by Age at Adoption
36%
27%
16%
11%
9%
1%
0 - 364 days1 - 3 yrs4 - 6 yrs7 - 9 yrs10 - 12 yrs13 - 17 yrs18 - 21 yrs
Average Number of Placements for Children in FY 2008, Based on Length of Time to Exit
< 1 yr 1-2 yrs 2-3 yrs >3 yrs0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Average Number of Placements for Children in FY 2008, Based on Exit Type
Adoption Aged Out Relatives Reunification Other0
2
4
6
8
10
12
3.8
10.0
3.8
6.3
8.7
Exit Type
Num
ber o
f Pla
cem
ents
Average Number of Placements for Children in FY 2008 By Exit Type and Jurisdiction
Bexar
Brazos
Centex
Cen. T
XDalla
s
El Paso
Harris
N. Panhandle
NE TX
Permian Basi
n
Rio GrandeSE
TX
Tarra
ntTa
ylorTra
vis0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
AdoptionAging Out
Race/Ethnicity and Disproportionality
Ethnicity of Children in PMC in FY 2008, Compared to Ethnicity of Texas' Total Child Population
African American Hispanic White Other0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
Children in PMC in 2008All Children in Texas in 2008
Percentage of Children Entering and Exiting PMC in FY 2008, by Ethnicity
African American
Hispanic
White
Other
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%
Exiting PMCEntering PMC
Percentage of Children Exiting Foster Care in FY 2008, by Race and Exit Type
African American Hispanic White Other0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
OtherReunificationAged OutAdopted
Physical and Mental Disabilities
Percentage of Children Identified as Having a Physical or Psychological Problem in FY 2008, by Age
< 1 1 to 3 4 to 6 7 to 9 10 to 12
13 to 17
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
Without Physical/Psychological Prob-lemsWith Physical/Psycho-logical Problems
Jurisdictional Data
The jurisdictional data demonstrates that there is great diversity in outcomes for children in different jurisdictions. These variations are attributable to a wide range of variables including availability of resources, utilization of available resources, judicial philosophy, judicial experience, judicial leadership, demographics and regional values.
Number of Children in PMC in FY 2008, by Texas Court Jurisdiction
2882
296 382 419
1545
350
3767
240 171 323665
206
1015
116
839
Jurisdiction
Num
ber o
f Chi
ldre
n
Percentage of Children Exiting PMC in FY 2008, by Jurisdiction and Exit Type
Bexar
Brazos (
CC)
Centex (
CC)
Cen. TX (C
C)Dalla
s
El Paso
Harris
N. Panhandle (C
C)
NE TX (CC)
Permian Basi
n (CC)
Rio Grande (C
C)
SE TX (C
C)
Tarra
ntTa
ylorTra
vis0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
AdoptionAging Out
Major Findings
Positive Forces Texas Family Code tracks best practices Concerned, Active, and Informed Leadership
CourtsDFPSCASA
Strong interdisciplinary Teams Under constant improvement
Most Jurisdictions: Believed they were doing a good job, or a
very good job Stakeholders had respect for each other Are concerned and care about the children But – the outcomes for their children is poor
Poor Outcomes from: A lack of urgency to find permanent homes for these children
A lack of accountability and preparedness for these children’s
well-being
A lack of clear roles for the legal participants
A sense that the children themselves do not need to be heard or
that their presence in the courtroom would be harmful to them
A void in the courtroom of individuals who really know the child
A lack of communication among stake holders
Recommendations
1 Pilot18 Recommendations
Benchmark Permanency Hearing Pilot
Background70% of children who enter PMC leave foster care within 2 yearsMajority who remain leave at 18 with no permanent home or
support network Goals/Objectives
Ensure focus on permanencyUse timelines and review criteria to encourage on
accountabilityMore closely ensure permanency plan is realistic and
achievableClarify stakeholder roles in PMC stageChange lax perceptions of the process
Benchmark Permanency Hearing Pilot
Scheduling Order Hearing – 45 days
Permanency Implementation Hearing – 90 days
Permanency Progress Hearing (currently entitled
Placement Review Hearings) – as often as necessary, but no longer than every four (4) months
Benchmark Review Hearing – 2 years
Permanency Progress Hearings every four (4) months, every third Permanency Progress Hearing replaced by Benchmark Review Hearing
Judges must recognize their critical role in the PMC process Court duties:
Protect child’s best interest
Require adherence to the law
Hold individual stakeholders accountable
“Proactive, Well-Informed Overseer”
Children and youth must be in court
Importance to JudgeFacilitate collaborationEncourages
accountabilityValuable information
directly from child
Importance for ChildExpress her opinionFeels valuedGives sense of some
controlMakes the process
“real”Realize people are
looking at her future
Placement Review Hearings should take place as often as necessary, but at a minimum should occur every four (4) months.
Casey Family Programs finds promising practice to be every 3 months.
Six months “forever” in the life of a child
Stakeholders wait until last minute to act
Helps avoid losses in progress due to turnover
In every PMC case there should be an advocate for the youth. The advocate can be a CASA volunteer who is appointed as the Guardian Ad Litem (GAL) or as a friend of the court or another GAL
Guardian ad Litem = ensure the child’s best interests are served
Attorneys ad litem must be appointed or retained when adversarial legal issues arise and there is a conflict amongst stakeholders
Conflicts can arise between: AAL (child’s wants) GAL (child’s needs) DFPS (parent)
Attorneys must be prepared to hold the judges accountable by appealing decisions when necessary
Every child should have a volunteer Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA) and CASA must be allowed to present before the court
Currently serve in most TMC cases
In the past, removed from PMC cases due to lack of resources
Seeking to ensure volunteers stay on case once child reaches PMC
A child had been diagnosed with cerebral palsy and could not walk, CASA discovered the child did not have cerebral palsy and now the child can walk.
A child had a brother in CPS care, but CPS could not locate the brother. CASA located the brother and now the siblings are reunited.
Notice of placement review hearings must be provided in accordance Texas Family Code
Entitled to notice: DFPS Foster parents Pre-adoptive parents Relatives of the child providing
care Director of group home/institution
where child resides
Each possessory conservator/guardian
AAL GAL Volunteer advocate Any other person or agency
named by court as having an interest in the child
Docket schedules must be composed efficiently so that children and stakeholders can attend
“Easy” cases earlier in the day allowing 20 minutes
“Complex” cases in the afternoon allowing 30-60 minutes
Easy adoptions first thing in the morning
Ensure all have two hour window where case will be heard
Judicial training is essential
The Supreme Court of Texas’ Permanent Judicial Commission for Children, Youth, and Families is developing a bench book that should be available at the end of the year
Benchbooks or Bench Cards should be studied and utilized
Video instruction on how complete hearings should look
Implicit bias and undoing racism education How to speak to children Trauma-based care Transition planning
Quantitative data should be used to help judges gauge their improvement in getting children in permanent and safe homes as quickly as possible
Child Protection Case Management System (CPCMS) is provided for free through the Office of Court Administration. It incorporates 19 of the 31 performance measures developed by the Department of Justice, National Center for State Courts and the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges. However, most courts cannot afford the technical support for maintenance.
Conclusion Tx has all the elements
needed for true change Committed
stakeholdersStrong StatuteJudicial leadershipWilling partners
Time to make the changes:Change perceptions of
children in PMC Change perceptions of
court procedures Implement
recommendations