Teleconference with Christy Lawton

Citizen Review Panel

Thursday, June2, 2011

3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

Teleconference with Christy Lawton

Minutes

Present: Susie, Stella, Steve, Kristin, Dana

Absent: Bonnie

Guests: Christy Lawton, Coleen Turner, Joanne Simmerman, Sara Alden, Tim Huffman

1. Open for services cases

Christy: OFS: kids are candidates for care which means maybe removal.So eligible for IV-E, so can get any services kids in care can get.On spending matrix, can see categories available to out of home, in home, generally funding is available for kids in their own home, same as kids in out of home care.

Susie: we heard that not funded.

Christy: heard that before.Goal is to serve more kids in home, when hear things not funded, try to look at matrix and if funding not available then try to fund funding.

Susie: hear that workers don’t get workload credit for open for services cases

Sara: caseloads for open for services.Tracks open for services cases either in home or out of home, custody or non-custody.Not aware that there is any time when people don’t get credit for workload they receive.

Steve: work to keep kids in the home, somehow workers believe they don’t get full credit for that amount of work

Christy: in terms of in home cases, there is a more work, more frequent home visits.In Fairbanks and Anchorage there are workers who are only in-home so their caseloads are adjusted appropriately.

Susie: how do you compare workload credit and talk about it?

Tim: we don’t have a matrix that looks at case types and then makes sure the workers have an even number.That’s way credit is confusing to us.In home workers are doing more work.Maybe because the practice model requires more work, they feel like that is not being counted.Need to know more about what is meant.

Caseload reports looks at open cases.

Susie: If I’m social worker in rural area, with a handful of each type of cases…

Tim: There is no credit.We have to drill down to know what types of cases.Practice model doesn’t call for different types of cases to count differently.

Susie: What do we ask?

Tim: How do you not get credit?Extra work?

Steve: Seems like mostly in the small villages, about prevention work, maybe nothing yet occurs, but working with families because school and everyone is concerned.

Tim: Maybe not calling in home cases the right name.We have trouble intervening when not open case.

Christy: Prevention isn’t our role, working with tribal partners for them to pick that up.

Joanne: High family, high risk family, not working with families without PSR report.

Tim: If Steve’s perception is right, that’s correct because those types of cases aren’t cases so there is no credit.

• Funding not IV-E, how funded?
• Caseload credit for workers for these cases
• Adequacy of services to families, waitlist

Susie: If not adequate services, in home case open, but no services, how do you know kids are safe.

Coleen: Mechanism to keep kids safe, protective action plan, or safety plan.Not necessarily services to keep kids safe, but to get parents to the point where they can be safe.

Christy: Big culture shift in OCS that kids can be safe in home, even if parent has not stopped drinking or mental health is stabilized.Instead it’s about having supports in place to move in when parents aren’t being safe.Sometimes those plans aren’t sufficient.Sometimes, the people who were supposed to keep the kids safe didn’t, or those people didn’t know what their role was because worker didn’t explain it well.Or sometimes not good safety plan.

Kirstin: Inability to do appropriate safety plan, or lack of services or wait to get those mental health services.

Christy: Biggest problem with safety plan is that there aren’t enough people there to sustain it.Then kids do become unsafe. Workers have a hard time moving to a higher level or removing the kids if safety plan isn’t working.

Kristin: Partnering agencies haven’t seen safety plan.Once it gets written that gets checks off…

Christy: I don’t think there are a bunch of kids out there who are unsafe.But there are safety plans that aren’t ideal.But they are reviewed and staffed.Supervisors should look, in home safety plans should be staff

Sara: Protective action plans are reviewed within seven days and must be ended within that period, can be extended 7 days.Depending on [plan, can be every week or every month. Home visit requirements are monthly or more if needed.

Christy: In home cases are weekly, but state requirement is monthly.

Susie: When kid in in-home services is there a team?Is it formal?In out of services, is there a team?

Christy: In in-home cases, OCS worker isn’t services provider, but service coordinator, in conduit between people, but those treatment providers don’t have to come together monthly or anything.Not OCS requirement.

Susie: Christy will go into in home services in more depth in October. We don’t know if this is a problem, but we heard concerns about it.

• Adequacy of protection of children

1. Regionalized intake

Susie: We talked to Coleen a little about this.We wanted to open this up again, there are lots and lots of concerns about regional intake.My biggest concern is there isn’t feedback being collected from the people doing this.Implemented without the PR stuff being done that was discussed the first time when it got slowed down.Social workers don’t understand the criteria for cases getting screened in and out and workers aren’t being talked to.They have good reasons to be unhappy with it. We heard it in Mat-Su and Fairbanks.

Kristin: What we heard were cases screened out, new way to identify high risk families, cases screened out when if they had talked to the local worker, they would have screened the case in.

Christy: planning to talk about intake in October training and how it works.Communities meetings were held in every field office community before this was implemented.Their feedback, from tribal partners, is good, after implemented.

Susie: Mistake, about who was offender.

Christy: we didn’t go to surrounding villages, but it sounds like more outreach is needed, maybe satisfaction survey, do more exploration.

Susie: We heard that they didn’t understand new criteria that Fairbanks is using to screen in.Don’t know how or why or when that changed.Everyone’s perception is that OCS is taking fewer and fewer cases.

Kristin: It was consistent.

Christy: We have narrowed.We have closed the door some, in terms of what gets in.Made some decisions about serving too many families, being more precise about who we are serving.

Kristin: The stories we heard weren’t cases that shouldn’t be screened in, but were serious cases. Kids were left in unsafe situations.

Christy: Then intake is not doing their job.They should be getting the information from the local community.It’s not perfect, but a work in progress.

Susie: What did you look at to decide who can receive services and who can’t.

Christy: Looked at the Alaska statute, to see what was included.Old P3s didn’t raise to level, general wellbeing.Not child protection.Families need to be effectively served in their own communities.Families need help and support, but not tribal intervention.

Coleen: Hope to share data with CRP at some point.Heard lots of anecdotal, but thinks the data tells different story.Put a lot of time into seven communities, but not as much into training for intake workers.

Susie: We’re looking forward to hearing that in August.

Steve: After hours phone call, we made.

Susie: We called the number…

Christy: Alaska has never had a 24 hour hot line, we’d like to do that. And ideally have staff to accompany Troopers for off-hours calls. We’d like that. The caller shouldn’t have taken information.

Sara: When you called the answering service, what did you say you wanted to know?

Susie: We called and asked what she would do in various circumstances.Not OCS employee, if she bound by confidentiality.

Sara: It is set up the way you described it.Sometimes they are put through to the on-call worker depending on who they are (night worker at hospital for example).We get contact info so we can call them back in the morning.

Christy: If emergency, they should call 911 because we can’t get there as fast as police.Regional intake is first step.

Susie: Why not have someone work swing shift?

Christy: Might not have enough calls to keep workers busy.It would need to be statewide, have a couple people answer calls.

Tim: Would need call center…

Christy: Not undoable, but just on the list of things we’d like to do if we had money.

1. Training ideas

• No adoption training in years—that’s true, will be training soon, working on it
• Check-in with social workers after one year—check in after a year to ask what they would like more training on, where they live determines what issues they need training on, Christy: UAA does call workers after 6 months and asked about needs, annual staff survey about training, what gaps, etc., also on the job training
• Coleen: CSMs and other people worked on five areas of practice model to meet needs, she meets with workers a couple weeks into training plans to see how they are doing.Asks about learning styles, should help with retention; they have their own IEP.
• Steve: Military is really good at, after a year of doing a job, know better what you need to know, talk about training needs, they form a team with supervisor.Make them succeed.
• Supervisor training –couldn’t remember why on there
• Staff managers, the ‘5s’coordination, time to meet together—Christy: if they want that they are welcome to have that
• Steve: at DJJ good to have someone from state office there to keep agenda moving, not just grip session, will follow up on it
• Christy—don’t want to add a meeting unless people really want it

1. Fairbanks CAC, no dedicated staff to conduct interviews

Sara: No unit, MDT made up to do those interviews, all staff are trained in forensic interviewing, is continual support for staff who don’t do it very often.All IA staff are trained and do it frequently. Steve’s Place staff are trained too.

Kristin: I talked to CAC, Troopers, and staff, not comfortable doing it because don’t do it often enough.OCS not participating.

Christy: No specialty unit except in Anchorage

Sara: OCS staff decline to do the interviews.It is an issue, have heard all this before, trying to develop a plan to work on it.Communication is needed, OCS is often the last to know staff didn’t want to do interview. Tried to get co-located and work on it.

Christy: can have some workers take sex abuse cases so they get better and more comfortable. Law enforcement tends to do more interviews.

1. Staff evaluations

Susie: What’s the status?

Christy: Holding accountable on this, some offices are good at this, and other places aren’t.Trying to be timely about evaluation, Northern and Anchorage are good, working on it with other regions.Everyone gets evaluated.I got evaluated six months ago.

Dana: Does it go both directions?

Christy: No departmental policy to ask supervisees how they are, but it happens in some areas, gained popularity, but not in writing requiring it, some people are interviewing, other send out e-mails,

Stella: Do staff ever have a chance to offer feedback confidentially?

Christy: Been thinking about a virtual suggestion box that could be anonymous.Could do something with surveymonkey.

1. Background check contract

Susie: OCS has contract for someone else to do background checks?

Christy: Licensing background checks are done by public health. Trying to streamline it for all HSS divisions. Be more efficient, faster and more accurate.

1. Fairbanks OCS number—ease of finding in phone book

Susie: been 7 years, hard to find in Glennallen

Christy: need to work with people who produce the phone books, could be easier, Coleen can work on it locally, have state workers look into, not on anyone’s radar to deal with, let’s not talk about next year

1. Limit new programs and maintain the same terminology (e.g., ongoing cases, permanency cases, family services cases all the same thing) , PCS another new thing

Susie: Overwhelmed with new programs, nobody asks them, the names keep changing…line workers are frustrated, just want to get good at something.

Christy: Said no to lots of things, PIP wraps up in 6 months, everyone has initiative fatigue, we want to keep things the same

1. Anya James case

Christy: case opened last fall, been working last fall with family, had several reports prior with that since Anya closed her foster care license in 2004, had finalized last adoption, so dropped license because would be inspection, concerns about animals, fire marshal, adoption reports were standard—no red flags in adoption study,

She asked to have licensed closed and no legal standing to get in

Some screen out reports, only at end did they hear about the conditions the kids could have been in

Some investigations were very thorough, talked to people justifying meds and reasons for low weight of kids, she snowed everyone, not just OCS

Only one investigation where didn’t go into home or interview kids outside home, she declined a lot every year,

Susie: do you think OCS was negligent?

Christy: didn’t do everything, some did really well and some did okay job.One PSR that shouldn’t have been screened out that was, big concern. Kid recanted which was why screen out, but kids do that. Didn’t lose sleep over the way it was happening.Lots of people saw these kids and no one was tipped off.Places could have done better. No providers being investigated related to case.

Susie: After file review, any suggestions to avoid this again?

Steve: Subsidized adoptions?

Christy: No legal right to review, no authority to do on-going monitoring. No sure how many people would choose not to adopt with on-going monitoring.Would take a lot of people. Try to learn from people who are collectors of animals or kids.Especially special needs kids.

In investigations always have to go into the home, intimidated out of going into home. Don’t ask about animals, in terms of numbers or treatment of, and we know people abuse animals who abuse kids.

Some people can handle multiple special needs kids even though we couldn’t.Nothing for CRP to do related to James case or things coming out of it.

Susie: Don’t need more info.

1. CRP August ORCS training with Tim

Confirmed with Tim

1. CRP September training with Christy (at training academy)

• Safety assessment
• Impending danger
• Protective capacity assessment

Confirmed with Christy

CRP only business (after Christy hangs up)

1. Recap of call:

Kristin: Liked some answers, others didn’t care for how they responded.

Susie: Add in-home cases and RI to October agenda

Dana: Felt the same way, intention of Christy was guarded, not intentional listening, explaining away stuff

Susie: Felt rushed

Follow-up on lack of credit for open for services cases

Steve: Negative feeling, not good sense of what small community social workers are doing, huge different in what rural workers are doing versus what urban workers are doing

Kirstin: Need to see data, Coleen wants to prove her right

1. Decide if we want to talk to Joanne Simmerman (supervisor of all rural field offices in Northern Region)

Don’t need to talk to her

1. Recruiting

• Pat Hefley (decide if interview, gather times for interview)
• Jeanne Evans (decide if interview, gather times for interview)
• Still need one more person…

Kirstin: working on Linda

Schedule with Pat and Jeanne

1. Blake visit

• Decide if interested, he pays for travel expenses
• Not interested

1. File access issue (update on meeting with Senator Coghill)

Will have answer by June 30th

1. Budget

• Dipping into next year already
• Do people appreciate minutes enough to spend money?

Get with Coghill in mid-July, provide budgetfor additional money

1. Annual report—process and deadlines to finalize (due June 30th)

Susie: Send out recommendations 1 and 3 to review.

1. Interior site visit report—do people have things to add after today?

Get comments by July 12th