Minutes

Children Services Committee Meeting

September 11, 2002

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

Present: John Shore, Brenda Jackson, Sue Kearns, Velvet Newman, Joyce Gardner, Denise Shaffer, Beckie Kimbrell, Sonya Toman, Denise Boyette, Tom Brewer, Adgenda Turner, JoAnn Lamm, Chuck Harris, Cyndy Benson, Janie Fisher, Elsie Roane, Linda Galacci, Wanda Bullard, Connie Oxendine, Keith Davis, Debra Jacobs, Stoney Blevins, Bertram Wilson, Sara Anderson Mims, Osborne Shamberg, Lisa Roberson, Pam Grantham

Conclusion: Approved minutes of July/August meeting.

Action Items:

·          

Person Responsible:

Deadline:

2.       IV-E Audit Results

Discussion: Chuck Harris reported that Federal IV-E review has been concluded.  At the exit conference staff were told State passed review without any ineligible records.  Hard work everyone did in cleaning up records is credited with success.  State staff review of records week before review enabled staff to defend cases.  Federal review team was willing to hear arguments and cut us some slack.  Last week we had supervisory meetings around the state to go over lessons learned.  CPRs will be following up with counties on each record.

Conclusion:

Action Items:

·          

Person Responsible:

Deadline:

3.       Prevention/Training Issues in re: Rilya Wilson Case in Florida

Discussion: Specifics of this case were discussed last month.  State staff has prepared some draft policy to deal with the missing and/or run-away kids (sent out prior to meeting).  At any particular time we have about 100 children who are run-aways.  Issue was raised about children not in care, but under investigation whose parents flee.  There are no inter-state regulations dealing with CPS investigations.  Discussion was raised about whether it necessary to motion the court or just communicate to the court through other means.  The conclusion was that was the most appropriate way of notifying the court was by motion.  Counties should contact State if they have run-aways from other states where those states are not accepting responsibility.

Conclusion: Motion made to approve the policy brought before the committee.  Passed.

Action Items:

·          

Person Responsible:

Deadline:

4.       Update on Foster Care Utilization Review

Discussion:  Chuck reported that counties at the last meeting who had children 12 and under in a group facility where Medicaid was not paying were to give feedback to State staff about why those children were in those placements.  Handout of results indicated that of the 59 cases looked at 24 (41) were coding errors (22 of those from a single county); 10 were placed in a group facility because the needs of the children could have been met in a family setting but the “right” family could not be located; and, 25 were in a group facility because DSS independently determined that child’s needs could not be met in a family setting.  Chuck indicated that the number of children in care and placements is going down yet costs are up.  The increased unit costs are higher than the decrease in numbers.  State has concern with consistency in all areas but focus here is on placement.  Not having a structure for placement decisions is costing counties big bucks (State’s exposure is capped).  Clear messages to Chuck is 1) sometimes we want to place in family setting but can’t find the right family; 2) we feel that we can make decision independently without clinical input that child’s needs could not be met in family setting.  Experience in Casey model of involving others in placement decisions has resulted in fewer children being taken into custody – could similar model in making decisions on high-end placements result in different outcomes?

Conclusion: State staff will bring policy and training initiatives at future meeting for consideration by the committee.

Action Items:

·         Draft policies on structured placement decisions and training needs will be developed and presented to committee at a future date.

Person Responsible:

Chuck Harris

Deadline:

None

5.       Update Foster Care Licensure Changes

Discussion:  Foster Care licensure changes were presented for further review.  A major concern was the requirements for recording of non-prescription medications.  The Pediatric Society recommended that normal dispensing of over the counter medications not be recorded unless given over an extended period of time.  Changes will be made to reflect this.  Another issue of concern was the need to meet building code requirements – Elsie Roane will do further research and report back.

Conclusion:  Will bring back at Oct. 9 meeting

Action Items:

·         Refine changes in proposed manual

Person Responsible:

Elsie Roane

Deadline:

Oct. 1

6.       Overview of Structured CPS Intake Process

Discussion:  JoAnn Lamm reported that workgroup has been formed to look at a structured intake process.  Trying to develop a process that provides questions that delve into the issues raised by a report.  There is a lot of energy and commitment by the members of the group.  No target date for completion – will depend on how fast the workgroup can get it done.

Conclusion:  This will be brought back before the committee when a draft is ready.

Action Items:

·          

Person Responsible:

Deadline:

7.       Update on Division Meeting with DHHS Secretary

Discussion:  Chuck Harris reported that he met with the Secretary to discuss foster care.  He told the Secretary that this committee’s top concern was Mental Health services for children in foster care.  According to State MH plan, our children are priority #1 but this needs to be more explicit.  We want to more clearly make substantiated kids eligible for care; have an outcome goal of preventing kids from coming into care; and, have all area programs report outcomes.  Felt this would make real our kids being priority.  Chuck says that Directors should request to be part of the local planning effort.  If we get resistance, let Chuck know.

Chuck also asked about revision to foster care rate structure to give emphasis to family based care.  Need to get working on to get into legislative hopper.  Brenda will put together a work group.

Conclusion:

Action Items:

·         Work group on foster care rates will be put together

Person Responsible:

Brenda Jackson

Deadline:

ASAP

8.       Review of Issue on Testing out of Pre-Service Training

Discussion: John Shore mentioned that the issue of using temps in Child Welfare faced a barrier of the workers having to have had pre-service training.  The question was raised as to whether people could “test out” of some or all of the pre-service training.  The State Training Committee is looking at this and will report to this committee in the future.

Conclusion: 

Action Items:

·          

Person Responsible:

Deadline:

9.       Revisit In-Home Aide Policy (discussed in March)

Discussion:  In March this committee said that no change was needed in the existing policy, it is working the way it is.  The committee voted to reiterate support for the existing policy.

Conclusion:

Action Items:

·          

Person Responsible:

Deadline:

10.    Potential Issues for Consideration by this Committee for the Remainder of the Year

Discussion:  Chuck Harris said that their staff had brain stormed some issues that the committee may wish to take up during the next year.  This is in line with the committee developing a work plan.  Issues listed by Chuck were: 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; and, 12) re-authorization of the IV-E waiver.

Conclusion:

Action Items:

·          

Person Responsible:

Deadline:

11.     

Discussion:

Conclusion: 

Action Items:

·          

Person Responsible:

Deadline: