|
| RESULTS
Child Welfare Agency Poll Understanding of ASFA Respondents were asked to rate their agency's staff in terms of their understanding of ASFA requirements by ranking the level of understanding of managers, supervisors and workers on a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 being 'poor' and 5 being 'comprehensive'. The average ratings appear below:
Respondents were asked to comment on the rating they gave. Eighteen (18) comments were given regarding managers. Of those, 44.4% indicated that managers had more training on ASFA than supervisors and workers. When commenting on the rating for supervisors, of the 13 comments made 61.5% indicated that supervisors had a good understanding of some elements of ASFA but not others. Comments regarding the rating of workers were more diversified: among 25 comments made, 32% indicated that workers had a good understanding of some elements but not other elements, 24% indicated that high staff turnover rate affects worker understanding and 16% indicated that workers had just started training. In terms of understanding of ASFA then, managers ranked ahead of both supervisors and workers. The comments made suggest that managers are ranked higher in understanding because they have had more training, while supervisors know the ASFA requirements that pertain specifically to their areas of responsibility. Workers' understanding is good; they practice the requirements but may not know ASFA as the source of the requirements and high staff turnover affects their understanding. Selected Participant Remarks Regarding Understanding of ASFA: From a practice perspective, the workers understand and are implementing the ASFA principles. They may not, however, know that the practice is a requirement of ASFA and related regulations. (CO) Some of our workers are in very specialized roles and jobs so they know their piece of ASFA very well; however, they have a less comprehensive understanding than supervisors and managers. (AK) Skills Respondents were asked to list the skills that managers, supervisors and workers need to have to implement ASFA. The top skills for each are listed below. Manager's Skills
Supervisor's Skills
Workers' Skills
Interestingly the skill most often mentioned for managers, supervisors and workers is casework. Among the skills mentioned most often in all three categories were collaborative skills and understanding of how to implement ASFA requirements. Respondents thought that communication was an important skill for supervisors and workers, but less important for managers. Using data effectively was a skill respondents thought mangers and supervisors should have but that it was far less important for workers. Selected Participant Remarks Regarding Skills: Managers need to be able to prepare other agencies for the practice changes resulting from our implementation of ASFA. (NY) Managers need to be able to sell staff the idea that ASFA requirements are good for families as well as being federal requirements. (ME) Managers need the same skills to implement ASFA as they usually need. They need to have knowledge of laws and federal policy implemented in the context of Vermont, no matter if it is ASFA or Title IV E, etc. They need to know what the requirements are and why they are doing what they are doing. (VT) Concurrent planning requires people to be able to deal with conflict resolution around case management issues. We need to be more skilled at bringing up differences of opinion and mediating the differences on a case by case basis. (ND) An ability to determine what data they need to do their job, how to use tools to analyze the data and how to put the results of that analysis into action with their staff. (OR) Supervisors need to know what to do to meet ASFA requirements while maintaining a good clinical practice; they must maintain a balance between the two. (MA) Concurrent planning is a challenge to implement. Workers now must quickly establish strong relationships with families and discuss with them often difficult and conflicting messages about services, potential outcomes and treatment plans. All of this must be accomplished in a very fast period of time. (OK) Staff need to know that ASFA requires major changes system wide and that supports and resources will change to allow an opportunity for success for children and families in very short timelines. (DE) Workers need to maintain a quality approach in spite of short time frames. (VT) Activities Respondents were asked if, as part of the ASFA implementation, the agency had undertaken any activities in five areas. A brief summary of the responses appears below. Selected participant remarks, which appear below as well, are very informative regarding any changes made. They give specific details of the activity undertaken, why it worked and, in some instances, how it differs from practice and procedures before ASFA. Agency structure. Of the 46 states responding to this question, 45.7% had changed agency structure based on ASFA. Among the changes mentioned most often were that a department or unit had been restructured, staff had been added or a procedure or process had been changed. Internal communication. Of the 45 states responding to this question, 80% had undertaken ASFA related activities in the area of internal communication. Activities mentioned most often were an increase in communications, circulating written material about ASFA and more interaction among team members. Performance appraisals. Of the 46 states responding, 16 states have undertaken ASFA related activities in the area of performance appraisals. The activity mentioned most often was that performance appraisals had been changed to reflect ASFA mandates. Job descriptions. Of the 46 states responding, 10 states have changed job descriptions as part of their ASFA implementation activities. Staff recruitment. Of the 45 states responding, only 7 states have implemented any activities in staff recruitment in response to ASFA. Selected Participant Remarks Regarding Activities: Arizona hired a Statewide Permanency Coordinator who reviews the cases of children in care 15 of the last 22 months and works with the Districts to support the development of case specific plans and services. (AZ) Connecticut created an in-house legal division in July of 1998 in anticipation of increased legal work as a result of ASFA. It has 8 staff attorneys assigned to the 14 regional offices. (CT) Alaska hired new staff for several of the field offices to focus on children listed on the transition list and then on children who have been in care the longest. (AK) Florida has agency child welfare attorneys in most of the districts. Those attorneys used to report to the local administrator, now they report to general counsel in the state office. (FL) We started a mediation process for kids in care whose goal has been changed to adoption. The mediation responsibility is contracted out. The mediator is appointed by the contract agency. The mediator works with the family to work out a mutually acceptable arrangement regarding TPR. (MA) We revised licensing standards so there is one process for foster/adoptive families. New positions were added for licensing supervisors. (MS) The Division of Youth and Family Services formed new units, called Regional Permanency Units, in each of our four geographic regions. These units are comprised of experienced DYFS staff. The workers in these units take on tasks that move cases toward permanency. They do not assume total responsibility for a case, but rather, they supplement the work of the regularly assigned caseworker. (NJ) We changed our agency structure and added a Policy Planning and Research Division to handle new data requirements. (TN) At state administrative level, we have blended out of home care, adoption and out of home services. (UT) As part of the on going administrative process, we send out management reports to the regions that contain data on performance at the case level and progress toward outcomes. These reports are issued monthly. (IL) We are using and looking into ways to get accurate information out quickly so we are using more teleconferencing and video conferencing and are looking into setting up chat rooms. Technology is taking on a new and more immediate importance for us. (NY) Maryland's training includes developing web site materials that focus on the new directions that need to be taken to comply with ASFA requirements. The web site has been successful in making staff more aware of the requirements. (MD) There are regularly scheduled management meetings devoted to ASFA issues. Protective services, foster care and adoption personnel, as well as staff from the regional offices attend the meetings. Those attending take information back to the counties. This is especially important for regional staff who provide technical assistance to the counties. (Ohio is a county administered state) (OH) We started an e-mail newsletter. It includes information about ASFA, but also includes information on other topics as well. (TN) New Mexico is a consent decree state. Due to that and the requirements of ASFA, our performance appraisal system for managers, supervisors and staff includes outcomes, such as meeting staffing requirements and reviewing data, which they are evaluated against. (NM) Virginia is a county administered state. Performance reviews are done at the county level. A review tool is being developed so that local agencies can look at themselves. The tool is modeled on the federal review tool. (VA) Performance appraisals are linked to qualitative reviews. Utah developed its own process for qualitative review. A team reviews selected files, similar to federal reviews, and interviews the participants in the cases. Supervisors and caseworkers are rated on those reviews, including reviews for ASFA requirements. (UT) Wisconsin is a county administrated state. It is presently piloting a revised performance appraisal in 10 counties to review the performance of the county agencies. It is based on the elements in the federal review. They have also issued a policy directive for county status reports on children identified who have met ASFA TPR timelines. (WI) Our job descriptions, particularly for managers, are starting to reference the ability to understand and use data in decision making. (AL) Training Respondents were asked to describe the training given to staff in their state. Statewide training sessions on ASFA were mentioned most often as a method of training. Agency staff, including training unit staff and central office staff, were mentioned most frequently as doing the training. Others who were mentioned as providing training included consultants (17.9%), state university staff (where the agency had a partnership with the university for training) (14.3%), court staff (10.7%) and regional staff (8.3%). Forty-eight responses were made regarding whether training on ASFA is incorporated into other training provided; 73% of the comments indicated that ASFA training was incorporated, 16.7% indicated it is incorporated into new worker training and 10.4% indicated it was not incorporated into on-going training. Training Methods
Most agencies (84.4%) had done training with or for the courts. When asked to describe the training, respondents replied as follows: Training with or for Courts
Selected Participant Remarks Regarding Training: We do child welfare training, not ASFA training. (NY) A series of forums was held throughout the state attended by field staff and stakeholder groups. In each region or parish community partners were included. ASFA philosophy and changes were explained to these groups. (LA) Program managers responsible for foster care and federal funding provided the initial statewide training. The training was given to managers, supervisors, private agencies, tribes, legal personnel, federal funding staff and persons responsible for the statewide information system. Supervisors then trained workers. A second training occurred around the new electronic case plan form. The case plan incorporates a lot of ASFA requirements and requires staff to respond to issues of safety, permanency, individualized service, concurrent planning and compelling reasons. The training included a review on the intent and requirements of ASFA. Later training was also provided to foster parent trainers. (WA) The Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare, in conjunction with the PA Bar and American Bar Association, convened 4 one day sessions for various groups that share in the implementation of ASFA, such as judges, child welfare directors, agency attorneys, mental health reps, CASA's and parent and child attorneys. Entitled, "The Pennsylvania Implementation of ASFA: Sharing the Responsibility", the day started off with an overview of ASFA from the national perspective. Then it moved into panel discussions from each group represented covering the strategy they were using to implement ASFA, what they found to be the most difficult challenges and what was the most positive aspect for them. Over lunch, each group discussed the 3 most important issues for them relating to ASFA and what resources/support they needed. The remainder of the day was spent on joint implementation planning. These sessions were taken seriously by participants, very well received and extremely effective. Folks stayed the whole day and were actively engaged in the problem solving process. (PA) Every year Florida hosts a conference for court and child welfare personnel. During the conference there will be professional workshops and circuit break-outs offering opportunities for localities to look at problems and develop action plans. While ASFA itself isn't the prime agenda item, issues its implementation can raise, such as concurrent planning, timelines and procedure changes, are included on the agenda. The event is 3 days long and draws over 1,000 participants, approximately half from child welfare and half from the courts. (FL) As part of our new worker and on-going staff training we routinely offer two courses utilizing local juvenile judges: Testifying in Juvenile Court and Permanency & Termination of Parental Rights. We also utilize the juvenile judges in providing a one day course for foster parents: Juvenile Justice for Foster Parents. (IA) An Attorney General is assigned to work with the agency. He works with
the Court Improvement Project to provide training for judges and court
staff. Training will be implemented within the next year through the Court
Improvement Project - training will be directed to social services staff
and court personnel. (WY) Information Systems Respondents were asked to rate the support provided by the state information system for the work of managers, supervisors and workers in implementing ASFA on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being 'poor' and 5 being 'outstanding'. The average rating was 3.14. Among states that rated their information system as a 1 or a 2, comments indicated there was a SACWIS system in use but it did not adequately support user needs or there was not a SACWIS system in place. Selected Participant Remarks Regarding Information Systems: We have a SACWIS system in place. People are getting used to using reports and we are still dealing with the issue of getting workers to use the system and to make sure data is accurate. One method that has worked is to circulate data and ask workers to correct, if necessary and return. (NE) We have a new SACWIS system; it is just a year old. It does a nice job incorporating ASFA information, for example we have ASFA alerts for children in care 15 of the last 22 months, and risk assessments with a question regarding concurrent planning. However because the system is so new, we have no baseline data on outcomes. Our focus has been on implementing the system, getting the bugs out and making it user friendly for the social workers. The analysts have just started looking at reporting for ASFA and planning for those reports we need. (ID) We are constantly enhancing our SACWIS so that it supports ASFA. We are not fully there yet but we are consistently working to update and improve the system. (AR) Staff Support Shown below are the activities mentioned most often by the child welfare agency respondents as working well in supporting staff as they implement ASFA requirements. Most Effective Practices for Staff Support
Selected Participant Remarks Regarding Staff Support: Colorado created a video for workers to use when discussing permanency with families.(CO) Idaho created a brochure for families, which discusses permanency planning for children in clear, respectful language. The Idaho regional staff asked for help explaining concurrent planning to families because, despite up front discussions between the social workers and the families, some families were having difficulty understanding the options and process. This brochure gives families something tangible to look over when they are ready. (ID) The Director developed and managed a process that resulted in priority objectives for the agency regarding permanency and placement. A driving belief that guides our practice is that 'the state makes a poor parent'. The Director monitors progress toward meeting the objectives and continues to discuss them with County Directors and staff. These objectives are not special projects, they are integrated into our day to day work. (SC) For the past several years, we focused on SACWIS---developing it, implementing it and trying to work with it. We had a lot of staff resistance and many workers felt that their work was more about RICHIST than about families. When the Child and Family Services Review came along, it helped us shift our focus back onto practice and children and see RICHIST as a tool to help us with that. The review instrument was so strong and such a good teaching tool that all of a sudden, as we were implementing it, the lights went on and folks clearly saw casework again and the elements of good casework. The review helped us see ASFA as good casework practice. (RI) Oregon is planning to implement co-case management of TANF and Child Welfare cases and ultimately will be working to integrate alcohol, drug and mental health case management also. (OR) Our clear vision for what we want North Carolina's services for children to look like has been a support through several struggles. The vision, which was at least 6 years in the making, sets the direction for all our decisions, services and priorities. The counties agree with the vision and that has helped us 'stay the course'. (NC) "For while I ate, breathed and slept ASFA. I am pleased with the success of the effort. There has been no negative fallout." (Supervisor, IN) What worked best was cooperation among stakeholders and key people. They were involved in the beginning on the ASFA committee and then were asked to do training on ASFA. The result was an atmosphere of support. People "embraced it and really believed in it". There was a whole spectrum of people who were saying the same thing consistently. The same information came from all levels. (IN) We are constantly focusing on issues related to ASFA, especially outcomes and Child and Family Services Review. (KY) We reinforced successes and that leads to buy in by staff. It is possible to see that the focus on moving kids who are stuck in the system into adoptive homes has produced results. It is harder to show how many kids have gone home; once staff can see that, it too will reinforce success. (ME) ASFA was viewed as a change in policy. The agency has a system in place to handle major policy changes, including ASFA. The process for handling changes includes making change a priority and working to get staff buy-in by circulating information such as manuals and bulletins and incorporating changes into training sessions. The goal is to get people to buy into the change and understand why it is important. "Have to make changes caused by ASFA a way of thinking and implementation a priority." (MI) The presence of two specialized staff members who helped with ASFA implementation worked for us. One was the county attorney who worked with the counties on various aspects of ASFA requirements. In addition, she did some of the training and disseminated information to county staff regarding ASFA. The second was a county social worker who worked in the central office for awhile to work with the counties as they implemented ASFA. (MN) We developed case plans that have ASFA outcomes built in. (MO) Frequent training and discussion of the ASFA requirements have been helpful in increasing the depth of staff understanding of ASFA. ASFA is complex and its system-wide implications cannot be understood and handled quickly. (NV) We encourage staff and monitor how they are doing with implementation. (SD) A series of meetings was held attended by central office staff, caseworkers and supervisors. Groups were small so there was opportunity for interaction and to talk about individual cases. The meetings helped empower staff to handle changes. (TN) Barriers The barriers to the agency's support for staff as they implement the requirements of ASFA mentioned most often appear below. Barriers to Agency Support
Selected Participant Remarks Regarding Barriers: We'd like to hear how someone has been able to comply with ASFA with insufficient staff and a lack of cooperation and communication from other community and agency partners. (HI) Of the 47 states where the poll was conducted, 11 were state supervised, county-administered states. These states were asked to what extent does the fact that their state is county-based impact ASFA implementation. Among the 17 comments received, almost a third (29.4%) indicated that the county-based system was responsive to local needs. Other comments were: communication is difficult (17.6% of comments); there are few uniform practice standards (17.6%); the approach is more fragmented and may be less efficient (11.8%); state control is limited (11.8%) as are resources (11.8%). General Remarks In conclusion, respondents were asked if there was anything else they wanted to tell us regarding the best way to support staff as they implement the requirements of ASFA. The comments appear below:
Selected Participant Remarks Regarding General Remarks: As we continue to expand our cross system, joint decision making, we will increase our reliance on the use of teams in the casework process. Teaming, especially cross agency teaming, is a new approach for some of the staff and we need to provide a clear framework and philosophical base for team decision making. (CO) One of the best ways to support staff is to improve the type, quantity and quality of services available for children and families. (OK) ASFA should be viewed as 'good practice' and training should reinforce a focus on supporting best practice versus the requirements of ASFA. (AR) The best way to support staff is to demystify ASFA and help staff see that ASFA is about what we want for families, not about the imposition of outside federal requirements. (AL) The key is being able to obtain the resources necessary to keep caseloads at a reasonable level so the workers can meet best practice standards and get needed services to families in a timely manner. (AK) Get management to organize the system, including policies, procedures and role expectations, to support workers. Workers will usually do what you want them to do but they need to understand the expectations. With ASFA, the practice issues are fairly straightforward; it is the system issues that are the challenges.(CA) You have to think of ASFA not just as a child welfare problem, but as something that will take the efforts of everyone to implement. (IN) It takes time to go out and give individual workers the support they need. You need to send support staff out to talk workers through cases on a case by case basis if necessary. (IN) ASFA is very complicated. Managers and supervisors need to be able to break down the complexity into manageable pieces for field workers so they can handle the requirements. Management and support people need to be able to help people in the field. (KY) Don't get caught up in the specifics of ASFA requirement. Provide the best service you can. (MA) Review ASFA requirements frequently; there is training every 3 months for new workers. Times and dates are sometimes emphasized rather than quality of case planning. (MT) Provide support for staff by allowing time for them to acquire knowledge they need. Administrators and managers need to let people use creativity in working with families. (OH) Good casework is still the same; you just have to document it the right way. (TX) The training about ASFA should include the philosophy behind ASFA; give
a broader picture. Also, you need specific skills training to develop
competent supervisors and a good information system to support casework.
(WV) COURT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT POLL Understanding Court improvement project personnel were asked to rate the child welfare agency staff in terms of their understanding of ASFA requirements on a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 being 'poor' and 5 being 'comprehensive'. The average rating given was 3.25. When asked why that rating was given, most participants (3 out of 4) said that child welfare agency staff had a good understanding of some elements of ASFA, but not others. Selected Participant Remarks Regarding Understanding: The child welfare agency in Wisconsin operates in a state supervised-county administered system. The state staff is well educated regarding ASFA; however, understanding in the counties varies. There are staff shortages at the state level so sometimes no one is available to disseminate information into the counties. (WI) Skills Court improvement project respondents were asked to list the skills that based on the court's experience to date, child welfare supervisors and workers need to have to implement ASFA. The skills mentioned most often are listed below. Supervisor's Skills
Worker's Skills
As expected the skills that court improvement project personnel think supervisors and workers need to have are focused on their understanding of the law, information sharing and the ability of agency staff to testify in court regarding ASFA issues. Child welfare agency staff, however, think the top skills needed by supervisors and workers are understanding case work, communication, collaboration and an understanding of ASFA in general. With child welfare agency staff there was not the emphasis on knowledge of the law or testifying in court. Selected Participant Remarks Regarding Skills: They must know how to assist their staff to testify in court regarding permanency planning. They must help their staff have a clear understanding of safety---how to describe safe living conditions and how to testify that a child is safe. (PA) Recognizing the extensive amount of information a worker must have in order to respond to a judge's questions during a hearing, the supervisor should take the time to observe more court proceedings to better understand the expectations of the courts and thus better prepare their workers to meet those expectations. (FL) Activities Court improvement project respondents were asked if, as part of the state's ASFA implementation activities, the court and the child welfare agency had undertaken or changed day to day activities or changed communication. Respondents reported that changes had occurred in both areas. For example, work groups had been formed to deal with ASFA implementation and with case processing issues and mandatory court order forms were being amended jointly between the courts and the agency. In the area of communications, two thirds (66.7%) of the comments noted increased communication between the court and the agency staff. Selected Participant Remarks Regarding Activities: The Court and Child Welfare automated data systems now exchange information so that the Court knows key facts such as the case number, the date that services were accepted and the date that children went into placement and the agency knows up to date information on hearings from the Court's records. (PA) The Court Improvement Project has had a Model Court Project in Philadelphia going for 2 years. Previously, instead of the case social worker, the DHS Court Representative often appeared in court to represent the department. Now, in every Model Court case and more and more in other dependency court cases, the social worker is expected to be in court prepared to testify on the safety of the child's placement. (PA) At the state level a working group has been formed comprised of state agency staff and the Court Improvement Program coordinator. The purpose of the work group is to deal with ASFA implementation issues and to prepare for the federal review scheduled to take place in 2002 and 2003. The group meets twice a month. (WI) At the county level, work groups comprised of the county agency director, agency supervisors, district attorney, corporation counsel, public defender and guardians ad litem court staff, have been set up to address case processing issues related to the ASFA requirements. (WI) WI is in the process of developing a checklist for judges and social workers to determine when the next case event takes place. (WI) Sharing Information The project team asked court improvement project respondents if they were getting information they needed regarding cases from the agency. All respondents said they were. Selected Participant Remarks Regarding Sharing Information: Communication between the agency and the court has increased. Sometimes communication is difficult because judges must deal with all kinds of cases in courts, not just child welfare which represent from 8-12% of the caseload. Agency staff doesn't receive training on court structure or what the courts do and what they need. Sometimes the state agency doesn't know how to communicate most effectively with judges because the agency doesn't fully understand the institutional structure and culture of the courts. (WI) The court Bench book has been distributed to child welfare agency personnel and attorneys. Reasonable effort forms have also been distributed to agency staff. (MD) Training Respondents were asked how they handled training on ASFA for court personnel. A number of different training methods were used. The ones mentioned most often were joint training sessions with the child welfare agency on the requirements of ASFA and attendance at conferences by judges, agency staff and masters that included ASFA topics. Selected Participant Remarks Regarding Training: Agency and court staff have different needs regarding information about ASFA so it is difficult to train them at the same time. Also, judges need to know different things about a case than the things caseworkers need to know. (WI) What Worked Best Respondents most often said that the increased communication has worked best for them in terms of working with the child welfare agency as it implements the ASFA requirements. Selected Participant Remarks Regarding What Worked Best: The Director of the Court Improvement Project is able to go to the agency and participate in planning discussions. It has helped to have someone with a court background to provide feedback in these discussions. (WI) What worked in MD was having agency staff active on the Court Improvement Project and when the statute was revised the Attorney General got feedback from the agency. (MD) Barriers Lack of resources including staff, funds, time was mentioned most often as a barrier in the court improvement project's work with the agency as it implements the requirements of ASFA. Selected Participant Remarks Regarding Barriers: The rotation of judges and turnover of child welfare workers create a constant need to train and retrain on dependency issues and establish and refine relationships. (FL) Lack of understanding of the responsibilities of the key stakeholders' responsibilities and how their organizations/institutions are structured. (WI) Making sure that the agency understands the law, which is especially difficult in large jurisdictions. (MD) Coping with lack of time and resources to provide needed training. (MD) General Remarks When asked if they had any other comments to make regarding the best way to implement the requirements of ASFA, respondents made several which are listed below:
|
 |
|||||
