Ramey County
Minnesota Child and Family Service Review
Program Improvement Plan
December 1, 2011- December 31, 2012

I. General Information

County/Tribal Agency:
Ramsey / Address: 160 E Kellogg Blvd
Telephone Number:
Primary Person Responsible for PIP:
Tarita Tyson / E-mail Address:
Telephone Number: 651-266-4243
DHS Quality Assurance Contact:
Shari Kottke, Steve Johnson / E-mail Address:
Telephone Number: 651-431-4706 (Shari) 651-230-2532 (Steve)
To be completed by DHS:
Date Draft PIP Submitted by County/Tribe: 11/23/11 / Date PIP Approved: 1/5/12
Due Dates for Quarterly Reports:
Quarter 1: April 15, 2012 (for Jan. 1 – Mar 31)
Quarter 2: July 15, 2012 (for Apr 1 – Jun 1))
Quarter 3: October 15, 2012 (for Jul 1 – Sept 30)
Quarter 4: January 15, 2013 (for Oct 1 – Dec 31) / Date PIP Progress Reviews Received/Occurred:
4/30/12 (extended)
7/13/12
PIP Completion Date:

II. MnCFSR PIP Recommendations (as indicated in the MnCFSR report)

PIP RECOMMENDATIONS
Safety:
Conduct timely face-to-face contacts with children in response to child maltreatment reports (MnCFSR Item 1).
Comprehensively assess and address risk and safety for all children on an ongoing basis (MnCFSR Item 4).
Develop strategies to reduce emergency placements made for reasons other than immediate safety (MnCFSR Items 3 and 5).
Reduce the rate of children re-entering foster care (MnCRSR Item 5).
Permanency:
Identify and address barriers to placement stability, focusing on children/youth in care for more than 12 months (MnCFSR Item 6 and Permanency Composite 4).
Develop and implement a systematic and systemic approach to permanency planning, and identify and address barriers to timely achievement of permanency (MnCFSR Items 7, 8, 9, 10 and 15, and National Standards, Permanency Composites 2 and 3).
Assess availability and access to resources that support and address barriers to comprehensive relative searches being conducted early and ongoing, ensuring placement with kin is fully explored and utilized (MnCFSR Items 12, 13, 14, 15, 16).
Ensure that frequent, quality parent/child visitations are based on children’ needs and reduce barriers to maintain parent/child relationships (MnCFSR Items 13 and 16).
Well-being:
Assess and address caseworker training needs related to engaging children and their parents in case planning activities, and developing effective case plans (MnCFSR Item 18).
Assess and address barriers to early identification and involvement of fathers in child welfare cases (MnCFSR Items 17, 18 and 20).
Evaluate agency policies and expectations related to offering and completing Children’s Mental Health Screening Tools and ensure adequate interventions occur specific to identified mental and behavioral health needs of children (MnCFSR Items 17 and 23).
Conduct face-to-face visits with children and parents at a frequency sufficient for conducting ongoing assessments of risk, safety, overall needs and case planning, and ensuring caseworker visits with children in foster care each and every month they are in placement (MnCFSR Items 4, 17, 18, 19 and 20).
Systemic:
Access technical assistance and provide training regarding permanency statute, policies and best practice (MnCFSR Items 7, 8, 9 and 10 (Case Review)
Strengthen and support role of supervision (Supervisor and Social Worker Resources).
Develop and implement a quality assurance program for gathering and analyzing data and results in the implementation of practice and/or system changes (Quality Assurance System)
SAFETY
Goal 1: Conduct timely face-to-face contacts with children in response to child maltreatment reports / Applicable Items and/or Systemic Factors:
MnCFSR Item 1(Timeliness of response)
Child Welfare Data Dashboard
Baseline (Performance at the time of the review):
Item 1: 100% cases rated as a Strength
2011 Screening within 24 hours: 99.7 % (1196/1199)
2011 Child Welfare Data Dashboard:
Q1 / Q2 / Q3
SCE / 83.3%
(30/36) / 92.3%
(48/52) / 80.4%
(41/51)
NSCE-INV / 84.7%
(72/85) / 83.5%
(66/79) / 87.4%
(97/111)
FA / 86.6%
(240/277) / 86.3%
(352/408) / 83.7%
(190/227)
Use the MN CW Data Dashboard as the method of measurement. / Demonstration of Goal Completion:
90% of children and families seen within statutory timeframes
PIP Updates
Q4, ‘11 / Q1, ‘12 / Q2, ‘12 / Q3, ‘12 / Q4, ‘12
SCE / 81.6%
(62/76) / 100%
(39/39) / GOAL MET
NSCE-Inv / 76.6%
(49/64) / 95.9%
(93/97) / GOAL MET
NSCE-FA / 86.6%
(232/268) / 88.5%
(285/322)
Action Steps
(include persons responsible) / Qtr Due / Date Completed / Quarterly Update
(Identify reporting quarter, e.g. Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4)
Intake Manager and Supervisors run "Time to Initial Contact with Victim" reports each month and review. Managers/supervisors identify any patterns or themes; develop a strategy, implement, monitor, and re-evaluate (Intake Managers and Supervisors) / All / Ongoing / Q1: Managers and Supervisors continue providing oversight to staff in regards to timeliness to initial contact. Supervisors continue to meet weekly and bi-weekly with staff.
Supervisors check timeliness to contact on all cases during supervision with staff. Staff are also required to inform supervisors when there are challenges that impede their timeliness to contact efforts. The Service Quality Assurance (SQA) tool is also being utilized to track and monitor “timeliness to contact” during supervision with staff.
Additional Training and a TIP Sheet covering how to accurately code (Initial Contact) Assessment/Investigation-Adult Interview or Child Observation/Interview into SSIS was provided to CP Intake Staff in Q1 as well.
Q2: We have discovered that “best practice” in achieving the “demonstration goal of completion” of “timeliness to initial contact” ensuring that timeliness to contact is met, is to keep it the focal point of discussion with staff. Thus, the Child Protection Intake Manager and Child Protection Supervisors, continue providing a high level of oversight to staff in regards to timeliness to initial contact. Supervisors run timeliness to contact reports (weekly). This has allowed us to catch and rectify coding errors (staff incorrectly entering client contact versus child observation/adult interview).
The Service Quality Assurance (SQA) tool is also being utilized to track and monitor “timeliness to contact” during supervision with staff.
Given the turnover of staff, we have also discovered that “best practice” is to provide individual and ongoing, quarterly trainings during unit meetings. Thus, there have also been additional trainings on CW-TCM Eligibility Screens and additional training and a TIP Sheets covering how to accurately code (Initial Contact) Assessment/Investigation-Adult Interview or Child Observation/Interview into SSIS.
During weekly/bi-weekly supervision, share report with social workers. Continue to clarify expectations of timely contacts and seeking supervision when unable to make contacts for strategizing. Additional resources may include: Utilizing Work Force Solutions, MAXIS, school records, Neighbors, BCA system, etc., that will aid in locating the family or individuals pertinent in the investigation/assessment.
Staff also report to supervisors and/or manager, exceptions for not meeting timeliness to contact, such as police investigations, when staff are asked by police not to have contact.
(Intake/Program Managers and Supervisors) / All / Ongoing / Q1: Supervisors are continuing to run “Timeliness to Initial Contact” Reports (during weekly/bi-weekly staff supervision) and require an explanation from staff when these timelines are not met. Staff continue to inform their supervisors when they are experiencing challenges in meeting their timelines. Also, staff are requesting to consult on cases prior to the initial contact timeliness expiring to explore additional strategies.
Q2: During Q 2, The Child Protection Intake Manager presented copies of the MN DHS Child Welfare Dashboard to “all” Child protection staff during unit meetings” and discussed the importance of meeting timeliness to initial contact timelines; in ensuring the safety of children and fulfilling one of their primary functions of their duties and responsibilities. Departmental protocol was also discussed: Staff are required to inform supervisors when there are challenges that impede their timeliness to contact efforts (before timelines expire); to discuss other ways in which the family may be contacted, if law enforcement has prohibited contact and other “approved” exceptions for not meeting initial contact timelines. In the event that a timeline to initial contact is not met, Intake Supervisors must notify the Intake Manager with the “impeding” reasons why the timeline was not met. The Intake Manager reviews the notification and determines if the impeding factors meet with exception or not. The notification that a timeliness to contact was not achieved is then forwarded by the Intake Manager to the Director of the Children and Family Services Division.
Measurement/Monitoring Plan: SSIS General Reports, Timeliness to Initial Contact Report, on a monthly basis.
Role of the Supervisor: Run SSIS General Reports, on a monthly basis, share with Program Manager and staff, determine barriers to compliance with statutory timelines, identify strategies, implement, and re-evaluate on a routine and frequent basis.
SAFETY
Goal 2: Comprehensively assess and address risk and safety for all children on an ongoing basis. / Applicable Items and/or Systemic Factors:
MnCFSR Item 4 (Risk assessment and safety management)
MnCFSR Item 19 (Worker visits with child)
MnCFSR Item 20 (Worker visits with parents)
Baseline (Performance at the time of the review):
Item 4: 71.4 % of cases rated as Strength / Demonstration of Goal Completion:
80% of cases rate a strength
Action Steps
(include persons responsible) / Qtr Due / Date Completed / Quarterly Update
(Identify reporting quarter, e.g. Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4)
Effective use of tools to inform case planning:
Use of the Comprehensive Family Assessment Tool in conjunction with Structured Decision Making Tools in assessing and addressing safety and risk, for all children on an ongoing basis. Supervisors will ensure tools are being used consistently and Safety Plans are developed based on either the 5 Factors (CFA) or Conditionally Safe/Unsafe (SDM) during supervision or as case circumstances warrant. (Intake/Program Managers and Supervisors)
CFA Model:
A key component of CFA is determining if a “safety threat” is present and developing either an In-Home Safety Plan or an Out-of- Home Safety Plan. A safety threat is based on five (5) factors: severity, imminence, vulnerability, out-of-control, and observable specific behaviors (All five safety threat factors must be present to constitute a safety threat). / All / Ongoing / Q1: Staff continue utilizing both the Comprehensive Family Assessment Tool and the Structured Decision Making Tools in assessing child safety and risk in both CP Intake (Assessment/Investigation) and CP Program (On-going Services).
The SQA tool is utilized on a monthly basis to conduct audits. Each supervisor audits 2 cases per Social Worker each month. The audits include a review of CFA as well as SDM tools to determine the safety of children (safety threats and safety assessment) as well as the domains to determine the focus of the case plan.
As of April 2012, supervisors have begun providing supervision to staff reviewing their caseloads three times per month. The Case Management Supervision tool was developed and implemented in April 2012.
Q2: Staff continue to utilize both the Comprehensive Family Assessment Tool and the Structured Decision Making Tools in assessing child safety and risk in both CP Intake (Assessment/Investigation) and CP Program (On-going Services).
The SQA tool is utilized on a monthly basis to conduct audits. Each supervisor audits 2 cases per Social Worker each month. The audits include a review of CFA as well as SDM tools to determine the safety of children (safety threats and safety assessment).
A key component of the Comprehensive Family Assessment is determining if a “safety threat” is present and developing either an In-Home Safety Plan (that addresses “protective capacity” within the home, ensuring the child’s/children’s safety) or an Out-of- Home Safety Plan. The SDM Tools in conjunction with the information gathered in the CFA domains determine the focus of the case plan.
Intake Staff: Traditional Investigation and Family Assessment Case Management and Program Staff attended a mandatory Ramsey County training on the new Out of Home Placement Plan and the revised SDM Family Strengths and Needs Tools. The training was provided by Michele Bennett, Management Analyst (SSIS Specialist). The training was provided to our staff on June 27, 2012 and on July 10, 2012. Ramsey County Child Protection Services would also like to receive the DHS/SDM Tools training as well.
Frequency of Social Worker visits with children:
Managers and Supervisors will utilize SQA to monitor frequency of social worker visits with children and families and utilize in supervision with workers. Level of risk will determine frequency of face to face contacts with families. Supervision of program social workers will increase to three time per month in March 2012 and four times per month in September 2012. Supervisors will continue with monthly unit meeting that address group clinical case consultation as well. (Managers and Supervisors) / All / Ongoing / Q1: Increased face to face contact with families will assist in ensuring the safety of children.
Supervisors continue to utilize the SQA tool to monitor the frequency of monthly face to face contacts with clients.
Supervisors also utilize the Case Management Supervision tool to track and monitor the frequency of face to face visits with children and families.
Supervisors are conducting monthly audits of all case management cases (Child Protection, Permanent Connections, and Children’s Mental health). The frequency of supervision occurs three times monthly.
CW-TCM reports are distributed monthly that show the number of face to face contacts achieved/attempted. This has increased accountability and performance interventions for staff.
Q2: The level of risk continues to determine frequency of face to face contacts with families.
High risk cases presenting with a “safety threat” in which an in-home safety plan” has been developed are required to receive weekly Child Protection Social Worker visits in both Child Protection Intake and Child Protection Program.
Supervisors continue to utilize supervision and the SQA tool to monitor the frequency of monthly face to face contacts with clients.
Q2: The Frequency of Supervision for Social Workers by the Case Management Supervisors has increased to 3 times per month. This requirement has been monitored and verified. Additionally the frequency of Social Worker visits with children (to include documentation of contacts) has increased. In 2011 our monthly Case Worker visits with children was 48.9%, during the first Quarter of 2012 our monthly Case Worker visits with children increased to 78.5%.
We continue to monitor our CW-TCM reports on a monthly basis that reflect on a individual basis the Social Worker contacts with each child on their caseload.