Engaging Community Stakeholders and Building Community Partnerships

1. Engaging Community Stakeholders and Building Community Partnerships The National Child Welfare Resource Center for Organizational Improvement

2. Why Stakeholder Involvement is Critical • The child welfare system is much larger than the public child welfare agency. • No single agency can fulfill the responsibility of keeping children safe, in permanent homes, and achieving well-being. • The goal is to empower stakeholders so that the entire community takes child protection as its responsibility.

3. Why Stakeholder Involvement is Critical (continued) • Partnering with community stakeholders helps create a constituency for child welfare, so that when the agency needs support it gets it (for example, legislation, finances, respect even in the fact of a child injury or death). • Partnerships also strengthen community stakeholders.

4. Successful Stakeholder Involvement Means: Collaboration and partnerships as a way of life for the public child welfare agency, not just for the Child and Family Services Review (CFSR) and the IV-B Child and Family Services Plan (CFSP).

5. Stakeholder Involvement in • CAPTA • Chafee • Title IV-B • CFSR

6. Successful Stakeholder Involvement is Achieved by: • Gathering input from stakeholders • Including stakeholders in decision making • Giving feedback to stakeholders • Continuous communication • Making stakeholder involvement an integral part of agency operations • Practicing true “collaboration”, not “cloberation”

7. Who are Potential Stakeholders? • Internal to the child welfare agency • External

8. Levels of Community Partnerships • Basic, effective referrals of families for other services (case level). • Joint case planning with other service providers, the family, and the family’s network (case level). • Joint program development to create needed new programs and services (intermediate level).

9. Levels of Community Partnerships (continued) • Shared organizational infrastructure—written agreements for information sharing, joint management information systems, staff liaison positions, locating staff in another agency, etc. (intermediate level). • Creating a Stakeholder Collaborative for Child Protection in a jurisdiction, with its own governance. • Creating a State-Level Stakeholder Collaborative, or Cabinet for Children, Youth, and Family Services.

10. Culture Shift: The State Public Child Welfare Agency • Not the sole provider of child welfare services • Leadership: catalyst and organizer for a community-based system • Retains legal responsibilities for protection of specific children

11. Culture Shift: Community Partners • More collaboration among previously autonomous funders and agencies • Renegotiation of roles and responsibilities

12. Promising Practices in Community Partnerships • Mental Health Systems of Care • Child Welfare Systems of Care • Quality Review Processes (CQI/Case Reviews) • LAN 29

13. Mental Health Systems of Care • Comprehensive service array • Coordinated • Community based • Child centered • Individualized for the family • Culturally competent • Family driven • Early identification and intervention

14. Child Welfare Systems of Care • Tbd in Dec.

15. LAN 29 • Collaborative integrates traditional and non- traditional services/supports • Membership open to all • Governance structure elected by members • Implements Wraparound approach • QUEST – serving DCFS families • Strong outcomes

16. Child Welfare Quality Improvement Peer Network (sponsored by the National Child Welfare Resource Center for Organizational Improvement) • QI roles include: • Review cases (read, interview, discuss, assess) • Review systems level data and reports • Make recommendations • Contribute to written reports • Dissemination of findings, e.g., presentations to other stakeholders

17. QI Peer Network (cont1) • Examples of ongoing issues and strategies • Ongoing structures for meaningful participation • QI, foster parent and youth councils (Illinois, Kentucky) • Citizen Review Panels involved in case reviews (Idaho, New Hampshire) • Preparation and support • Training (Idaho trains semi-annually due to turnover ) • Whose meeting: making QI relevant to stakeholders by focusing on their issues, perspectives and involve them in setting agendas and problem solving, not just listening to information (Illinois)

18. QI Peer Network (cont2) • Other methods for input • Child welfare attends specific audience councils (foster parents and youth) and gathers information to bring to CQI councils (Hawaii) • Targeted surveys - to specific stakeholder groups on specific issues. E.g., Kentucky has surveyed regarding: • CW/Court partnerships • Service array assessment • Youth services • Fatherhood services • Family team meetings

19. QI Methods to Share Information: Wisconsin’s PEP website • Stakeholders access website for the four program enhancement plan (PEP) work groups (adoption, case process, QI, and Out-of-Home Care) to review policy initiatives, ask questions, comment and read others’ comments, questions and answers • http://dhfs.wisconsin.gov/cwreview/bulletinBrd.htm

20. CFSR: Collaboration with Community Stakeholders • Principles • Partners • Processes • State examples

21. CFSR Collaboration Principles • Shared responsibility • Partnerships • Family centered and community based • Purposes, goals, time and effort

22. CFSR PartnersChildren’s Bureau Resource Guide, p 2 • Court • Tribal • Youth • Child welfare agency staff • External partners • Diversity-of-state representatives • Other

23. CFSR Collaborative ProcessesChildren’s Bureau Resource Guide, p 2 • Common goal • Benefit to all parties • Vehicle for collaborating • Ability to come to consensus • Strong leadership • Meaningful involvement • Shared success • Engage new partners • Shared vision for the future • Ongoing evaluation

24. Engaging Collaborative PartnersChildren’s Bureau Resource Guide, p 5 • Continually promoting CFSR • Match specific stakeholders to processes • Statewide assessment • Onsite review • PIP development • PIP implementation • Targeted outreach through effective channels • With each stakeholder: • Review advantages of CFSR and PIP collaboration • Jointly assess contributions, time commitment and resources • Explore how to sustain involvement • With stakeholder group • Establish “rules of engagement” • Communicate timelines for all activities and products

25. Using the CFSR to Build PartnershipsChildren’s Bureau Resource Guide, p 6 • Existing collaborations • Volunteers • Allocate child welfare resources and time • Communication vehicles

26. Finding Evidence of Strong Collaboration: Nine ElementsChildren’s Bureau Resource Guide, p 8 • Engagement of Other Partners • Communication • Needs assessment • Joint strategic planning • Sharing of resources and structural changes • Sustainability • Policies, laws, regulations • Research/data/evaluation • Leadership

27. Finding Evidence of Strong Collaboration: An ExerciseChildren’s Bureau Resource Guide, pp 8 - 10 • You are in one of four “element” groups: • Engagement of other partners • Communication • Needs assessment • Sustainability • Read your element from the CB Guide • Discuss examples from your state • Brainstorm other examples • List best examples so your group can report out

28. Critiquing Collaborative Efforts • Read your Case Study (1, 2 or 3) • Select people to • Take notes on Hand Out #9 • Report a synopsis of your case during plenary • Report your answers from HO 9 during plenary • In group, discuss each question and take notes • In plenary, report out • Synopsis of case • Answers to questions on Hand Out #9

29. Your State’s Previous CFSR: Involving Stakeholders • Identifying and recruiting • Preparing them for and sustaining involvement • + and – of the processes • According to stakeholders • Your assessment • Ongoing involvement? • Same groups? • Stakeholders involved in other child welfare agency work?

30. Agency Partners Eco-map • What additional partners should be added?

31. Stakeholder Engagement Plan: How, Who, When • Greens – Keeping positive involvement • Yellows – Improving relationships and enhancing involvement • Reds – Healing and re-involving • No Dot – Developing relationship and beginning involvement

32. Overall Strategy: Reflection and Planning • What was the overall process for the previous CFSR? • What should be the overall strategy for the second CFSR?

33. Planning Stakeholder Involvement at Each Phase of The CFSR • Statewide Assessment • Onsite Review • Program Improvement Planning • PIP Implementation • PIP Monitoring / Revisions

34. Planning Stakeholder Involvement for CFSR Outcomes and Systemic Factors • Outcomes • Safety (2), Permanency (2), Well-being (3) • Systemic Factors • Statewide Information System • Case Review System • Quality Assurance System • Staff and Provider Training • Service Array • Agency Responsiveness to the Community • Foster and Adoptive Parent Licensing, Recruitment, and Retention

35. Plans to Monitor Stakeholder Involvement and for Continuous Communication • Overall stakeholders involvement • Stakeholder involvement re the seven outcomes and seven systemic factors • Preparing for the Next Review • Reviewing drafts of Statewide Assessment and PIP

36. Wrap Up • No single agency, including the public child welfare system, can fulfill the responsibility of keeping children safe, in permanent homes, and achieving well-being. • Community collaboration of a full range of involved and committed stakeholders is the best hope and strategy for this.