Improving Outcomes for Parents with Alcohol and other Drug Problems in the

Child Protection System

2007 Minnesota Fatherhood Summit

Presenters Jackie Crow Shoe; MN DHS Child Safety and Permanency Division Deb Moses; DHS/Chemical Health Division Carole Johnson; Minnesota Judicial Branch

Presentation Objectives Developing a collaboration between

government agencies Developing practical products to meet

community needs Integrating AOD services into existing

systems Sharing lessons learned from parents

Children’s Justice Initiative A collaborative project between MN DHS and

MN Judicial Branch to improve the processing and outcomes of child protection cases

Mission: To ensure that, in a fair and timely manner, abused and neglected children involved in the juvenile protection court system have safe, stable, permanent families.

Key Features

Seen “through the eyes of a child”

Role of judge in managing case

Importance of Permanency

Timelines as a priority

Integrated statewide

CJI-AOD Project Under the umbrella of the Minnesota’s

Children’s Justice Initiative NCSACW In-Depth Technical Assistance Project Team

– State Advisory Committee– Core Team

• courts, child safety, chemical health, county, parents, community provider

– Pilot Counties• Mentor Counties - Itasca, Stearns• Ten Phase I Counties

Tribal engagement and involvement

CJI-AOD Project Seen as a priority

because of the nature of addiction and recovery related to child safety, well being and permanency needs

“Five Clocks” highlight challenge of competing timelines

The Mission of CJI-AOD

To ensure that, in a fair and timely manner, abused and neglected children involved in juvenile protection court have safe, stable, permanent families by improving parental and family recovery from alcohol or other

drug problems.

Minnesota’s Context Total Population over 5 million; Child Population 1.3 million

State Supervised; County Administered Child Welfare System

Primarily locally funded

Governed by Reporting of Maltreatment to Minors Act 626.556

18-19,000 reports per year are accepted for a CP response

– Almost half of all reports are made by school personnel and law enforcement

Regardless of response path

Disproportionately involves poor, single mothers and their children and families

of color

MN CPS objectives:

– respond proportionately to the severity of the safety concern

– enhance family engagement

– promote early intervention and prevention

– broaden community involvement

Differential Response System

– 57.5% received family assessment ; 42.5% an investigation

– Substantiation rate is 56% of all investigations

Consolidated Chemical Dependency Treatment Fund

– 28,000 public pay clients

– State funded – County Administered with a 15% match

– Free market treatment system

Majority of child maltreatment being addressed is for neglect (65%)

Families who neglected more likely to experience multiple

family issues, including alcohol and other drug issues and

poverty.

Approximately 1/3 of all families receive services.

AOD concerns are seen in over half of families needing

services.

Only 11% of all CP interventions result in a Juvenile Protection

Court Intervention of placement out of the home.

MN Differential Response Continuum

Family Assessment Response for less serious cases

– No determination of maltreatment

– Comprehensive– Strength-based community-

focused– Enhances Family Stability– Focus is on safety through

engagement

Investigation Response for

substantial child endangerment cases– Did maltreatment

occur?– Are Child

Protective Services Needed?

Incident based with a focus on fact finding

Forensic in nature; coordinated with law enforcement

May be perceived as intrusive and adversarial by family

The Five Clocks

MFIP

Child welfare system

Recovery process

Child development

Agency and staff timelines

Clock One: TANF

Work must be found within 24

months, when benefits cease.

Clock Two: Child Welfare System

Six month reviews of parent’s progress towards becoming a safe caregiver of children who have been removed from their home.

A court hearing at 12 months and a petition to terminate parental rights if the child has been in out-of-home care for 15 of the prior 22 months.

Clock Three: The Recovery Process Often takes longer than substance

abuse treatment funding allows.

Good outcomes are contingent on adequate length of treatment. This may be incompatible with child welfare deadlines.

The recovery timetable can be summarized as “one day at a time, for the rest of your life.”

Clock Four: Child DevelopmentAccording to research on braindevelopment, the developmentaltimetable that affects children,especially younger children, asthey achieve or fail to achievebonding and attachment duringtheir first 18 months of life iscritical.

A child’s sense of time is differentthan an adult’s sense time. Forchildren, the “clock” runs muchslower.

Clock Five: Agency and Staff Response Time

Agencies and their staff need toremember: The clocks never stop. The new child welfare and TANF time limits,

combined with what is known about child development and child attachment and bonding demand a more …best interests of the child / parent / family centered practice than ever before.

Priorities must be made for the permanent funding of programs and resources for timely assessment and intervention for prenatally exposed and children who are exposed daily to the environmental and familial effects of alcohol and other drug use.

CJI-AOD: The Why and How Now, more than ever, system collaboration is

needed to improve outcomes for children

Achieving Better Outcomes– Important for personal growth, healthy emotional

development, and positive sustained relationships of family members

– Can reduce future child safety concerns– Can reduce treatment recidivism– Can reduce broader community consequences

related to capacity, resources and cost

STEP 1: Using the 10-element Framework to

Set Priorities and Objectives Earlier engagement of parents in assessment,

treatment and recovery

Improved practice through cross-system collaboration

Increased flexibility in individualized planning and treatment services

Improved training on overlap impact of AOD and Child Welfare concerns

STEP 2:Establishing Shared Values and Principles

- Accountability: agencies cooperate and collaborate in order to establish the best outcomes

- Partnerships: actively involve families and communities in decision-making and solution building

- Service Delivery: assure fair and equitable access to early and effective interventions along the continuum of care

- System Resources: dedicate staff and resources to assist with implementation of project recommendations

Cross-System Practice Focus

Acknowledge deficits but focus on identifying family competence and seek to re-create the circumstances that allow competence to flourish.

Collaboration between the “systems” and the family increases the likelihood of finding solutions.

Choices made by the family are more likely to be implemented than choices made without their collaboration.

Success is a result of respectful interactions which recognize family competence, family choice and are demonstrated by: – Respect and honesty – Fairness and equity – Solution-focused mutual accountability – Clear and transparent communication– Active mobilization of resources to remove

barriers– Celebration of successes, however small

STEP 3: Review and Research

– Statewide best practice inquiry– Eleven parent focus groups conducted across

the State, including Leech Lake Band of Chippewa Reservation and MN Indian Women’s Resource Center

– NCSACW database search– Internet research on evidence-based

practices

Step 4: Analyze Emergent Themes

Suggested Engagement Strategies Family and Community Needs Cultural and Regional Dynamics Service Delivery Issues

– Communication and Information Sharing– Exit/Transition– Other Barriers and Challenges

Lessons Learned from Parents: Highlights

Use an approach that is collaborative, culturally competent, family-centered and strengths-based

The intervention was warranted at the time of occurrence in their lives – however services and/or the way they were delivered alienated the parent from wanting, believing and in some cases succeeding in making improvements with limited permanency time frames.

The encounters with each of the systems discouraged the parents from admitting their need for recovery or seeking the services needed for their families to become healthy.

Parents found themselves working through a seemingly endless, confusing and often conflicting stream of rules, requirements and paperwork.

Parents continually questioned how a system that is designed to help families justifies separating the family for the purposes of treatment and recovery.

Fathers expressed:– the need for reparation of the father-child relationship– inclusion in the intervention and recovery process– acknowledgement from professionals that they are

important in the lives of their children.

Step 5: Product Development1. Best Practice Tool Kit : 20 specific strategies

identified to achieve improved outcomes for Minnesota’s families

2. Training Plan: Rolling out the tool kit at the county level

3. Sustainability Plan: Recommendations to State Policy Leaders

4. Evaluation Plan: Measuring success

5. Parent Partner Model: includes a Parent Partner Handbook and Research Summary

Samples of the Best Practice Strategies in the “Tool Kit”

Parent Mentors/Recovery Specialists Parent mentors - work as a guide for parents working to enter and

maintain recovery, they can help educate the family on child welfare concerns.

Recovery Specialists - facilitate immediate access to services by assisting the parent/family in navigating and removing barriers as it relates to treatment and recovery

Shared Family Care designed to prevent out of home placement, allowing the entire

family to be placed in a supervised setting while parent works on recovery

Family Dependency Treatment Court Court based system combining criminal and juvenile protection

matters to quickly identify and assess parental AOD issues with frequent court supervision.

Motivational Interviewing training and client-centered, directive method for

enhancing self-motivation to change by exploring and resolving ambivalence thus better engaging the parent in the treatment and recovery process.

Wellbriety - Culture of Healing culturally specific training that applies the traditions of

the American Indian culture to the healing and recovery from AOD issues.

Individualized AOD Services for Children– Developmentally appropriate interventions to address

individual needs, based on comprehensive assessment

Father specific case planning Case planning should address the father’s needs in the same way that it addresses

the mother’s. Cross-system training on interacting with fathers who have chemical health issues

Improved Service Delivery to Fathers– CP and AOD service providers can improve services to fathers by convening focus

groups with fathers in recovery who have experience with the child protection system to identify barriers in their local system, and to elicit recommendations for constructively engaging fathers in the process.

Father - Specific Brochure– A comprehensive Know Your Rights and Responsibilities brochure for fathers

involved with families with AOD issues should be developed and widely distributed. Support Groups for Fathers

– An integral component of service delivery should be support groups for fathers with opportunities for child interaction.

Physical Surroundings That Embrace Fatherhood– Are there positive messages in the public waiting and meeting areas – both verbal

and non-verbal – about the importance of fathers in the lives of their children?

Next Steps: Implementation

Training Plan Implementation– Cross Systems Training Plan– October Kick off Conference– Implement best practice strategies at the local level

with state technical assistance• Direct support and assistance to Mentor and Phase I Teams

Sustainability Plan– Improve communication and data sharing – Support best practices– Develop performance measurements and follow for trends to

Implement Evaluation Plan

– Provides framework and sets out strategies for the systemic collection of information both regionally and statewide

– Is MN reaching intended outcomes and implementation goals with respect to families with co-occurring issues related to chemical health and child welfare?

– Developed in collaboration with the NCSACW, DHS-SSIS and Policy Coordinator, planning and programs supervisor, chemical health, Courts and a community stakeholder

– Design Information technology supports (SACWIS) to document and support services while providing ongoing feedback about outcomes

– State guidance on continual practice and system improvements

Closing Thoughts onSuccessful Partnering

Be Patient– Not every step is a success

Celebrate– Any and all progress should be acknowledged

Engage– Enlist the energy and wisdom of all

Be Consistent– Use a parallel process based on mutually agreed upon

principles– Nurture all relationships with compassion and honesty to build

trust and confidence

Further InformationChildren’s Justice Initiativehttp://www.courts.state.mn.us/page/?pageID=197&subSite=childrensJustice

Shared Values and Principals documentSummary of Parent Partner Focus GroupsResearch Report on Parent Mentor/Leader Models

CJI-AOD Project Members:

Jackie Crow Shoe, Social Service Program ConsultantDHS-Child Safety and Permanency Division (651)431-4676 jackie.crowshoe@state.mn.us

Carole Johnson, CJI Project SpecialistSupreme Court Administrators Office(651)296-2269 carole.johnson@courts.state.mn.us

Deborah Moses, Operations ManagerDHS-Chemical Health Division(651)431-3251 deborah.moses@state.mn.us