Minutes

Children Services Committee Meeting

October 9, 2002

1.       Review Agenda, Approve Minutes and Set New Agenda Items

Present: John Shore, Brenda Jackson, Velvet Newman, Joyce Gardner, Denise Shaffer, Beckie Kimbrell, Sonya Toman, Denise Boyette, Tom Brewer, Adgenda Turner, JoAnn Lamm, Chuck Harris, Cyndy Benson, Janice Fisher, Elsie Roane, Linda Galacci, Wanda Bullard, Connie Oxendine, Keith Davis, Debra Jacobs, Karen Ellis, Margaret Johnson, Marianne Iavorone, Karen Smith, Catherine Lambreth, Martha Sheriff, Sara Anderson Mims, Osborne Shamberg, Hope Hunt, Rebecca Brigham, David Atkinson, Ann Holley, Bertram Wilson, Lisa Roberson, Pam Grantham, Mike Herzing, Chris Sinha, Joyce Edwards

Conclusion: Approved minutes of September meeting.

Action Items:

·          

Person Responsible:

Deadline:

2.       Legality of Urine Testing CPS and Foster Care Cases

Discussion: Not ready for presentation this month.  State attorneys continue to say, “don’t do it.”  John Shore said that he had met with his County Attorneys that work with Child Welfare and they were comfortable with what Guilford County’s social workers were doing with regards to urine testing.  It was suggested that State Attorneys talk with Guilford County attorneys prior to this issue being brought back to the committee.

Conclusion: Will be placed on a future agenda.

Action Items:

·         Place on future agenda (December?)

Person Responsible:

John Shore

Deadline:

Dec. 3

3.       NCACDSS Strategic Plan & Committee Goals

Discussion:  The following potential tasks were listed for the Committee’s work plan for the next year: 1) policy on drug testing in CPS investigative assessments; 2) policy revisions to accommodate MRS statewide implementation; 3) policy/outcomes regarding placement appropriateness; 4) policy regarding kinship placements across county lines; 5) statutory changes for long session (includes proposed changes to foster care rate structure); 6) training issues (testing out, etc.); 7) structured CPS intake process/tools; 8) policy collaboration between child welfare and Work First; 9) update policy on confidentiality; 10) policy on post adoptive services; 11) issues regarding Hispanic and Native American populations; 12) re-authorization of the IV-E waiver; 13) having State system automatically notify counties of foster care rate changes triggered by change in age of child; 14) spreading Family2Family state-wide; and, 15) revision to family services case plan.  JoAnn Lamm requested that we identify the top 3 to 4 priorities to assist the State staff in prioritizing their work.  I was agreed that the committee would be polled via e-mail for their priorities.

Conclusion:

Action Items:

·         Committee will be polled to establish priorities among the task listed above

Person Responsible:

John Shore

Deadline:

Dec. 3

4.       Update on Multiple Response

Discussion:  Five of the MRS counties were present.  Positive feedback from counties and front-line workers.  Caldwell County reported that families are being receptive.  Reporters are asking that MRS approach be used.  Getting services in place sooner.  Mecklenburg County has not had as positive response from schools.  Not all investigators want to change roles.  Less cases coming to case management.  The schools not bought in yet but the county is continuing to work with them.  Alamance has met with stakeholders who have embraced the approach.  Assessors are loving the assessment!  Franklin County has had good response from reporters.  In Guilford County MRS has been positively received.  Guilford has expanded types of reports so now doing few traditional investigations.  Facing organizational and training challenges.  Feels good and feels right.  Guilford sees MRS as part of Family2Family (Casey initiative).

Chuck Harris interested in staffing issues raised – sees positive impact on down time when cases are transitioned.  Second issue is keeping cases moving and resolved in a timely manner.  MRS will have implications on how counties organize.  Sees Casey and MRS as same thing – philosophically consistent.  Child/Family teams take more time but time well invested that can save time elsewhere.

Brenda Jackson raised issue of costs.  What are counties seeing?  Guilford County does not see any additional staffing costs.  Small counties have had to be creative in perhaps seeking resources outside of agency.

Chuck said the Section is looking at having statutory changes ready for long session of the General Assembly.  The changes will be dependent on what happens in the10 pilot counties.

Conclusion:

Action Items:

·          

Person Responsible:

Deadline:

5.       Update Foster Care Licensure Changes

Discussion:  Elsie Roan recapped request for policy changes from last time: 1) reorganized policy to be easier to find information; 2) added cross references and page numbers; 3) relating to medication administration – clarified issues raised at last meeting; and, 4) clarification on building code.  On the building code issue, it is impossible to determine whether a building is truly compliant with the code at the time of construction.  The policy clarifies expectations of working doing the home inspection.

Conclusion:  Committee approved rewrite of policy.

Action Items:

·          

Person Responsible:

Deadline:

6.       Discussion on Inter-County Kinship Placements

Discussion:  JoAnn pointed out that with implementation of structured safety assessment questions were raised about whether safety assessment is conducted on kinship placements, especially is those placements are in other counties.  A problem was seen in the logistics of getting safety assessment done when placement resource lives in another county.  State staff is proposing that the other county do the assessment prior to placement.  Most present agreed that this would be “best practice” but questions were raised about how it would work in real world.  It was suggested that we poll line staff that actually do work to see how we can make it work.

Conclusion:  Talk to staff and will discuss next month.

Action Items:

·         Poll line staff about practicality of doing safety assessment in kinship placements

Person Responsible:

All

Deadline:

Dec. 11

7.       Update

Discussion:  Chuck Harris presented data from last fiscal year which reflected 1) a slight increase in CPS reports and number of children substantiated; 2) a decrease in the number of children in foster care; 3) set a State record for third year in a row on number of adoptions; and, 4) a decrease in the median length of stay in custody.

Chuck Harris announced that his position has been eliminated with the new budget effective the end of October.  Division has offered to find something else but Chuck feels he will leave.  Several present commented on the contributions Chuck has made to child welfare in the state.  Concern was expressed about the impact of this action on the child welfare system.

Conclusion:

Action Items:

·          

Person Responsible:

Deadline:

8.       November Meeting

Discussion: Due to the Social Services Institute being held in Charlotte next month at the same time that the committee would normally meet, it was announced that no meeting would be scheduled during November.  The next meeting will be on Wednesday, December 11, 2002.

Conclusion:  November meeting canceled.

Action Items:

·          

Person Responsible:

Deadline: