TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section I General Information 3

Section II Systemic Factors 13

Section III Safety and Permanency Data 37

Section IVNarrative Assessment of

Child and Family Outcomes 45

1. Safety

Outcome 1: Children are, first and foremost, protected from abuse and neglect.

Outcome 2: Children are safely maintained in their homes whenever possible and appropriate.

2. Permanency

Outcome 1: Children have permanency and stability in their living situations.

Outcome 2: The continuity of family relationships and connections is preserved for children.

3. Child and Family Well-Being

Outcome 1: Families have enhanced capacity to provide for their children's needs.

Outcome 2: Children receive appropriate services to meet their educational needs.

Outcome 3: Children receive adequate services to meet their physical and mental health needs.

Section V State Assessment of Strengths

and Needs 69

Attachments 83

Section I - General Information

Section IA

Department of Human Resources

Gary B. Redding, Acting Commissioner

Division of Family and Children Services

Juanita Blount-Clark, Director

Office of Adoptions

Velma McCray-Duncan, Acting Director

Department of Human Resources

In 1972, the State created the Department of Human Resources (DHR) to be the State's single human services agency containing the governmental entities that provide health, social and rehabilitative services. DHR is composed of five program divisions: Division of Family and Children Services; Division of Mental Health, Mental Retardation and Substance Abuse; Division of Rehabilitation Services; Division of Public Health; and Division of Aging Services. There are three offices: Office of Regulatory Services; Office of Personnel Administration; and the Office of Adoptions. The Division of Family and Children Services (DFCS) has overall responsibility for the administration and management of the State's public child welfare programs - Child Protective Services, Foster Care, Independent Living Services, and Family Support and Family Preservation Services. In 1997, Adoption services were centralized in the DHR Office of Adoptions and implemented through local county DFCS offices. DFCS staff carries out a wide range of responsibilities that support the delivery of financial assistance and social services.

Organizational Structure

The Division of Family and Children Services is a state administered county supervised system comprising 159 local county agencies. Within DFCS there are twelve regional service areas each having a Field Director, who is responsible for the direct supervision of the local county agencies and all service programs in that area. The Field Directors report directly to the Director of Field Operations, who reports to the DFCS Division Director. The Administrator of Georgia's largest local agency (Fulton County) is also the Field Director for that agency.

Within the Office of Adoptions, there are thirteen Regional Adoption Coordinators who are responsible for promoting and assisting in recruitment and intake and serve as resources for the local DFCS agencies in their areas. The Regional Adoption Coordinators report directly to the Regional Adoption Coordinator Supervisor who reports to the Director of the Office of Adoptions. The Office of Adoptions does not have administrative/supervisory authority in the local DFCS agencies that provide adoption services. The Division of Family and Children Services and the Office of Adoptions have a collaborative relationship.

The fiscal management of the Child Welfare programs is a joint decision making process between the Department of Human Resources Budget Services and the Division of Family and Children Services and the Office of Adoptions.

Mission of the Department of Human Resources

The Division of Family and Children Services and the State Office of Adoptions have continued to plan aggressively for child welfare improvements. This planning has been carried out in partnership with an array of allied agencies, formal and informal collaboratives, care providers, consumers to include families, children and youth served, as well as with the involvement of the communities at large. Public and media attention to child welfare services in Georgia has resulted in opportunities for in-depth examination of current practice and new opportunities to design programs that will offer expedient, high quality services to children and families.

The focus of the Office of Adoptions is to expedite safe and secure adoptive placements for children with special needs who are currently in the permanent legal custody of the Georgia Department of Human Resources (DHR). The Office of Adoptions was created by the Georgia Department of Human Resources' Commissioner at the direction of Governor Zell Miller on January 1, 1997. The creation of this state office was in response to recommendations from the Senate Study Committee on Foster Care and Adoptions and President Bill Clinton's Adoption 2002 initiative to double the number of legally finalized adoptions for children with special needs by the year 2002.

Services continue to be directed toward the mission and goals:

The mission of the Division of Family and Children Services is to assist Georgians in achieving healthy, independent and self-sufficient lives.

The goals are:

• Healthy children in safe, supportive and stable families.

• Able bodied adults gainfully employed with a living wage with the supports they need for themselves and their families.

• Neighborhoods and communities are safe and economically viable, provide opportunities, and support individuals and families in the care of themselves and their members.

The mission of the Office of Adoptions is to develop and implement an efficient, quality, outcome-based, special needs adoption program that will focus on the development of private, licensed, adoption agencies as resources; as well as, the identification and elimination of barriers to adoption that currently exist in the state system.

The goals are:

• Further Increase Adoption Privatization

• Increase Use of Adoption Assistance

• Innovative Family Recruitment Activities

• Private Sector Involvement

• Development of a Post-Adoption Services Program

Sources of Information:

The DHR relied on many sources to respond to the questions in the Statewide Assessment. In addition to (AFCARS) and (NCANDS) data, the social service policy and procedures manual was used. Data from manual tracking systems, developed by the Evaluation and Reporting Section when available, were also studied. Georgia is in the process of developing a Statewide

Automated Child Welfare Information System (SACWIS). Therefore, we are unable to answer the qualitative aspects of the questions.

We also obtained information from several surveys placed on our stakeholder's web-site; specifically, we conducted surveys with the following:

• Youth;

• Foster parents;

• Agency service providers

• Judges;

• State Assistant Attorneys General;

• Child Welfare Advisory Committee

Our surveys were used as an attempt to gather information on the overall effectiveness of the state's child welfare service delivery system. The survey covered areas of supportive services for youth in education, physical, mental and dental health; effectiveness of training offered to foster parents; birth parent and youth involvement in case planning; costs involved to provide basic foster care; and many other areas.

Background Information

Georgia's Child and Family Services Plan for FFY 2000 - 2004 is built upon the extensive participation process that began in 1993 when DFCS undertook a comprehensive participatory planning process to assess and redesign Georgia's child welfare services. This planning process was called "See A New Way" a five-year plan to reform Georgia's child welfare system. "See A New Way's" implementation is called "Child First" placing emphasis on Protection, Prevention, and Permanency. Integral to the planning and implementation of "Child First" has been, and continues to be, the participation and leadership of the 159 County DFCS Offices and the state's community of advocates, consumers and service providers. All of Georgia's subsequent plans for foster care, family support and family preservation services, adoption enhancements and child abuse prevention and treatment act efforts are guided by this original plan. Based upon the success of the "See A New Way" participatory activities, Georgia includes stakeholder participation in its program planning, design, enhancements, assessment and evaluation efforts. The inclusive participatory process employed for "See A New Way" has been institutionalized through several on-going and ad hoc advisory group, planning meetings, steering committees and constituency meetings.

The Child First Collaboration Committee was a continuation of the Child and Family Services Planning (CFSP) process which served as the IV-B Planning Task Force. This group has now become the Child Welfare Advisory Committee. This group was convened in March of 1999 to review current PSSF implementation status and proposed program modifications for FFY 2000. The Child First Collaborating Committee which has served as the governing and state oversight committee for the Program since 1996 will continue in its current capacity through FFY 2004.

DFCS leadership, from the outset of the CFSP five-year planning process, ensured that it would be an inclusive participatory process. Inclusiveness was and continues to be a key to the Guiding Principles, Vision, Goals and Strategic Directions of Georgia's CFSP and to the realization of the DFCS vision for child welfare reform.

The inclusive planning process for the CFSP included:

• Development of partnership with a variety of experts in child welfare, children and family services, strategic planning and statistical analysis to assist in the development of the plan.

• Comprehensive outreach efforts to inform stakeholders of the process and opportunities for participation.

• 66 Statewide local forums - 2 forums in 33 sites throughout the State.

• Constituency Meetings with a variety of family and children services stakeholders

To achieve the established planning goals, it was important to develop a set of guiding principles that would serve as a "road map" to guide strategic planning and uphold the multi-faceted vision of ensuring child safety, realizing child welfare reform, expediting permanency for children, and providing effective family preservation and support services for children and families. Plan development was centered around the following guiding principles:

• Build on Current Initiatives: Affirm what was already working to protect children and strengthen families. Identify what is effective so it can be a part of the "new way". Too many planning efforts focus on innovation and change at the expense of those good practice initiatives already in place. Georgia's CFSP did not make that mistake.

• Strengthen Capacity Within Communities: The most effective responses, supports, and services for families and children are those that are community based and are reflective of and sensitive to the uniqueness of individual communities and neighborhoods. The Georgia CFSP focused on working with and building the capacity of localities.

• Ensure Strategic Investment of Federal Funds: With the growing constraints on local and federal tax dollars, Georgia saw that it was crucial that funds be invested in ways that would "make a difference that makes a difference". In the five years of the plan Georgia has targeted funds to areas in which the greatest gains could be obtained:

• Continuation and expansion of already proven approaches;

• Replication of State and Nationally recognized and successful models targeted to address specific problems or populations currently under served; and

• Primary prevention services that prevent more costly interventions.

• Promote Collaboration/Inclusiveness: The planning process brought together the varied stakeholders to (1) encourage partnerships among governments, public and private service providers, between providers and the family and with public education; (2) promote ownership and responsibility on the part of providers and those served; and (3) focus on how to empower clients to become self-sufficient in ways that are consistent with their culture and unique needs.

• Promote Public Awareness and Support: The planning process was designed to be accessible to the public and provide opportunities for participation in the planning process. This was done through (1) mass mailings; (2) 66 local forums; (3) grassroots distribution of meeting announcements and surveys; (4) electronic and print media press releases and interviews; (5) conducting focused surveys of stakeholders; and (6) focused interviews and a technical assistance survey with all 159 DFCS County Offices.

• Keep Vision Focused and Results Driven: The CFSP process through local forums, stakeholders surveys and constituency meeting kept the Vision and Goals of Georgia's developing CFSP in the forefront. Through all of the methods used to develop the plan and strategic directions, the Vision and Goals were constantly used as the "yardstick" by which to measure the efficacy of the emerging CFSP.

• Focus on Establishing Outcomes and Realistic Measures: DFCS efforts in the development of the plan focused on measuring the indicators of "real change" in the lives of the families and children who would be impacted by the successful implementation of Georgia's CFSP. Focus on these indicators became clearly a more important and realistic measure, to stakeholders, of "real change" that the traditional approach of measuring "process" objectives (who, what, how many, type, duration and intensity of service).

• Develop Acceptance of Stakeholders: The foundation of Georgia's inclusive planning process was to promote the acceptance of family and children services stakeholders through (1) listening to them and including their ideas and recommendations; (2) providing them with statistical data and concrete examples of issues and areas for change within their communities; and (3) active solicitation of the community's response to and level of support the developing CFSP Vision, Goals and Strategic Directions.

The planning process was structured around the following strategies for achieving the established goals:

• Needs Assessment - Gathering, formatting and analysis of demographic data and children and family services indicators, for the State and for each of the State's 159 counties.

• Inventory of Resources - Core Services and Collaboratives that serve and/or support the Vision of Georgia's CFSP.

• Statewide Local Forums - A series of two forums in 33 sites for a total of 66 forums.

• Constituency Meetings - Focused meetings with a variety of family and children services stakeholders.

• Stakeholders Surveys - Seven (7) focused survey instruments (Child Protective Services, Foster Care Services, Adoption Services, Forum Stakeholders Survey, Non-DHR Services Survey, Grassroots Community Survey, and DFCS Staff Survey) distributed to over 5,000 stakeholders.

• County Technical Assistance Focused Interviews - 159 Phone surveys conducted with County DFCS Directors.

Through a strong emphasis on broad-based participation from all of the stakeholders in child welfare and the full array of children and family services, DFCS was able to:

• Strengthen the capacity of DFCS and communities to find new and more effective ways of working together in meeting family and children needs.

• Promote collaboration and partnerships at all levels among governmental entities, service providers, with public education and partnerships with those who are served by the system of family and children services.

• Build public awareness of the changing realities facing children and families and those charged with serving Georgia's child and families.

• Develop the acceptance, ownership and the active participation of a broad base of stakeholders in working with DFCS in making the Vision, Goals and Outcomes of Georgia's CFSP a reality.

The Georgia CFSP process and resulting five-year plan became the key component of the State's strategy for child welfare and child protective services reform and the plan was integrated into DFCS operations and decision making processes.

Vision

Through the CFSP "See A New Way" planning process, DFCS developed and gained support for the following Vision for "Child First" for the redesign of Georgia's child welfare services:

"Every child will be secure from abuse and neglect and will become a literate, productive, economically self-sustaining citizen within a nurturing, caring, permanent home environment. This will be achieved through the development and enhancement of a coordinated and integrated children and family services system which emphasizes collaborative approaches, earlier identification of issues and delivery of prevention and early intervention services which build on the strengths of families."

Georgia's five-year CFSP Vision of a desirable and achievable future for all of Georgia's families and children continues to guide key decisions in resource allocation, program and policy development, building private/public partnerships and for staff and practice development.

Strategic Directions

Georgia's DFCS built Georgia's five-year CFSP plan and the child welfare reform effort, "Child First", upon ten (10) key strategic directions. Managing change requires a solid understanding of the template within which these changes will take place and a "map" by which managers can provide direction for change. The strategic directions are based upon (1) the results of the inclusive planning process used to develop the CFSP; (2) the on-going and current initiatives and collaboratives initiated and underway in the State; (3) results of stakeholder's surveys and meetings; and (4) the DFCS "Child First" Vision for child welfare reform.

1. "Work First" - Work First is Georgia's welfare reform movement to promote the self-sufficiency of Georgia's families. An important way to realize the vision and goals of Georgia's "Child First" is through promoting the economic viability of families and the ability of family members to support the economic well-being of the family.

2. Child Protection - Prevention and effective early intervention based upon a proven and effective risk and safety assessment model are the cornerstones of Georgia's child protection and family preservation efforts.

3. Expeditiousness in Permanency Planning - Child welfare services in the State of Georgia need to move quickly in supporting and preserving families, to prevent out-of-home placement, to shorten the length of stay in placement, minimize movements when children are in care, and to move more rapidly to the goal and finalization of adoption when parents refuse or are unable to assume their parental responsibility.

4. Build Upon and Promote Replication of Current Collaboratives and Initiatives - Georgia is fortunate to have many excellent initiatives underway which address the vision and goals of Georgia's CFSP plan. Enhancing these efforts and replicating them in areas of the State that are under served is an important aspect of reform.

5. Promote Cohesiveness of Current Initiatives - Georgia's reform efforts link with and promote the linkages among the collaboratives and initiatives underway in the State.

6. Strengthen Planning and Collaboration Capacity of Communities - Programs and services are most effective when they are responsive to the uniqueness of individual communities and localities.

7. Provide for Community Input and Participation - In the implementation of child welfare reform, the CFSP process and on-going development and implementation of child welfare and child protective services initiatives, DFCS promotes community participation in the design and delivery of services.

8. Target Under Served Populations and Geographic Areas - Special efforts have been initiated during the life-span of the CFSP to target areas of the State that have unmet needs.

9. Management Support and Infrastructure Development - Georgia, guided by the CFSP has and continues to promote change in the State's child welfare system, including change in the focus, structure, and management of child welfare operations.

10. Strengthen Public/Private Partnership and Relationship Between State and County Offices - Crucial to the success of Georgia's CFSP efforts has been the extraordinary efforts implemented to strengthen the partnerships between public and private agencies and the relationship between the State and County DFCS Offices and staff.

CFSP Goals

Goal development for Georgia's CFSP and "Child First" was guided by four (4) major goals:

1. To Ensure the Safety and Well-being of Children

Effective and responsive safeguards that will ensure the protection, safety and healthy development of children must be in place. Essential supports and services for the child's family, the development of parenting skills, the accessibility of health services and developmental services need to be accessible and responsive. State-mandated child protective services must be strongly maintained and enhanced. DFCS needs to ensure the expeditiousness of permanency planning, expansion of adoption as a viable alternative, and the enhancement of adoption resources and supports, for those children whose parents are not willing or able to provide for their safety and development.

2. To Promote Family Empowerment and Parental Responsibility

To achieve the Vision of child welfare reform, it is crucial to build an integrated system of community-based supports, responses, opportunities and services that reflect the importance of strengthening the self-sufficiency of families and family members. When child safety can be ensured, the family is the best system to protect children and to support their healthy physical, cognitive, emotional and moral development. Supporting, building and preserving families requires a holistic and integrated community system that builds upon the strengths of families and the family's natural supports and affiliations.

3. To Empower the Systems Charged with Meeting the Needs of Children and Families

Real change in children and family services will not be realized unless actions are taken to support the systems responsible for making those changes real. As we change the direction and expectations of government entities and programs and providers of services, we need to provide the management support, infrastructure modifications, training and technical assistance essential to the realization of these new performance expectations.

4. To Promote and Enhance Systems Coordination and Collaboration

The complexity and variety of challenges facing children, families and those who serve children and families have, in quantity and intensity, become almost impossible to respond to in isolation. Both from a service efficacy and a service efficiency perspective, cross-system planning, coordination, collaboration and service delivery are essential to the realization of Georgia's CFSP child welfare reform Vision. Partnerships are needed at all levels: (1) Governmental - At and between the different levels of government: Federal, State, Local; (2) Community Partnerships: County, Community, Neighborhoods and public agency and private providers; (3) Partnerships of Service Delivery Programs and Staff; (4) Partnership between Providers and the children and families they serve; (5) Partnership between Public Education and the Family; and (6) Education and the Providers of family and children services.

The original members are:

Clinton E. Dye, Jr., Ph.D., Director, Social Services Section

Doris Walker, Manager, Foster Care Unit

Ann Dennard Smith, PSSF Program Manager, Foster Care Unit

Normer Adams, Executive Director, Georgia Association of Homes and Services for Children

Ray Adams, President, Foster Parent Association of Georgia

Marjorie Almand, Director, Bibb County Department of Family and Children Services

Michelle Barclay, Director, Court Improvement Project

Bessie Barnett, Georgia Consultant, Administration for Children and Families

Janet Bittner, Child and Family Coordinator, Vincent Institute of Government

Juanita Blount-Clark, Team Coordinator, The Family Connection

Judy Bodner, Director, Starting Points, Division of Public Health

Mary Ellen Brown, Director, Economic Support Services Section

Judge Virgil Costley, Jr., Newton County Juvenile Court

Cheryl Dresser, Deputy Director, Division of Community Programs

Dan Elmore, Director, Child Support Enforcement

Elaine Graddy, Consultant, Spalding County Department of Family and Children Services

Pat Gray, Unit Chief, FACETS Project

Judge Glenda Hatchett, Fulton County Juvenile Court

Section II - Systemic Factors

1. Statewide Information System Capacity

1. Discuss how effectively the State is able to meet the State plan requirement that it operates a Statewide information system that can determine the status, demographics, location, and goals for all children in foster care in the State. In responding, consider the accessibility of this information to State managers and local staff and the usefulness of the information in carrying out the agency's responsibilities.

2. Case Review System

1. How effectively is the State able to meet the requirement that each child in foster care under the State's placement and care responsibility have a written case plan with all the required elements?

2. How effectively is the State able to meet the case review system requirement that parents of children in foster care participate in developing the child's case plan? In responding, consider their participation in activities such as identifying strengths and needs, determining goals, requesting specific services and evaluating progress related to their children.

   The State promotes the involvement and participation of parents of children in foster care in the development of the case plan. Georgia's law, our policies and procedures all reinforce the concept of "inclusiveness" in planning and decision-making. Strategies, implemented by the State such as Family Conferencing and review mechanisms such as Citizen Review and Panel Case Review increase the effectiveness of the case planning process. As required by O.C.G.A. 15-11-58 (b) parents receive written notice (at least five days in advance) of the meeting to develop the contents of the case plan. Further, the law requires that any recommendations of the parent be included in the case plan when submitted to the court for review. At any judicial review of the case plan, the judge will require the county department to document in the Judicial Review Report (Form 392) the following: the parent's receipt of advance written notice, the extent of parental participation and the parent's agreed upon obligations (or why the parent does not concur). The lack of availability and/or involvement of the parent in the case planning process must also be documented. Parental involvement is also addressed as a routine part of Citizen and Panel Reviews. To ensure compliance with Georgia's law and federal requirements, policy instructions clearly delineate the role and responsibility of the case manager in notifying the parent (and other parties significant to the development of the case plan). Further, relevant topics for discussion and for parental input are outlined. Section 1006 (Assessment and Permanency) and Section 1007 (Case Planing and Review) are referenced as examples of policies and procedures for engaging parents in the identifying their strengths and needs (documented on Form 387) and their participation in determining goals and services (documented on Forms 389 and 390). Evaluating parental progress makes use of the case plan as a tool (Section 1006.9) during face-to-face contacts with the parents. Another tool is the "Permanency Time Line" (Section 1001.5) to reinforce parental involvement in relation to timely achievement of permanency. One of the key components of Georgia's "First Placement/Best Placement" strategy is Family Conferencing. (The Georgia Family Conference Handbook is referenced as the document that outlines the Division's procedures.) The model focuses on family strengths/needs and resources within the family unit and the community; both engage and support the family. Family Conferencing is recommended at critical points, such as the child's entry into care, the development of the 30-Day Case Plan, the Multi-Disciplinary Staffing (held at the completion of a Comprehensive Child and Family Assessment) and periodic case reviews. Contracts with private providers, such as Child Welfare Policy and Practice Group, are in place to provide on-going training and skills development to child welfare staff.

   3. Citing any data available to the State, discuss how effectively the State is meeting the requirement that the status of each child in foster care be reviewed periodically, i.e., at least every 6 months, by a court or by administrative review.

   Georgia does not have the capability for state level monitoring by the courts of the status of each child in foster care. Georgia law [O.C.G.A. 15-11-58 (k)] requires that the initial review of all children in care occur within 90 days of the entering of the dispositional order (incorporating the 30-Day Case Plan), but no later than six months following the child's placement. For many of Georgia's children, the earlier review process has resulted in expedited permanency. Following initial review, subsequent case reviews are held no less frequently than every six months. Interim reviews are scheduled, as requested, by the court or review panel. For the last ten years, Georgia has operated a Judicial Review System which requires that the status of each child in care be reviewed by a juvenile court judge, associate judge or judge pro tempore, or by Judicial Citizen Review Panels established by the court. Currently, 60 (out of 159 Georgia counties) have court-appointed, trained volunteers who act in an advisory role to the judge. The Permanent Homes for Children in Georgia administers the Judicial Citizen Review Program. The county department's case plan is reviewed and submitted to the court, along with the Citizen Panel Findings and Recommendations. Local Program Coordinators are responsible for scheduling timely reviews and sending advance written notices to all parties participating in the review. Appendix Q of the Foster Care Services Manual contains the Program Guidelines for the operation of Judicial Citizen Reviews. In the unlikely event that a Judicial or Citizen Review cannot be held in a timely manner, Divisional policy outlines "back-up" procedures to ensure timeliness. Specifically, an Administrative Panel Review must be conducted which meets the requirements set forth in Public Law (hereinafter PL) 96-272; e.g., composed by a three person panel (one member of whom is out of the direct line of case responsibility, open to the participation of the parent and child, etc.). Subsequent reviews are triggered by the last review date, whether the review was conducted as a Judicial, Citizen Panel or an Administrative Panel Review. All policies related to periodic case reviews are found in Section 1007, Case Planning and Review of the Foster Care Services Manual. Although state level data will not be available until Georgia SACWIS is fully operational, current monitoring instruments include the Placement Supervisory Review Guide and the Evaluation and Reporting Review Guide. The case manager or supervisor may request a report ("Review/Custody Due/Expired") to serve as a tickler and/or to assist in case management. The tickler system is used for internal review.

   4. Citing any data available to the State, discuss how the State meets the requirement that permanency hearings for children in foster care occur within prescribed timeframes. Discuss the effectiveness of these hearings in promoting the timely and appropriate achievement of permanency goals for children.

   
   

   Georgia's "motion hearing" to extend custody and the required "permanency hearing" are usually one and the same; i.e., during the course of the hearing, the permanency plan is determined for the child in foster care. The duration of temporary custody is 12 months from the child's entry into care. Policy requires that a petition be filed 90 - 120 days prior to the expiration of the current order to ensure timeliness of the hearing. This requirement became necessary due to delays in hearing cases. However, in the 2000 Legislative Session, House Bill 182 was passed to expand the coverage of juvenile court judges in all Georgia counties. When fully implemented, Georgia will have a more uniform juvenile court system and reasonable court dockets to improve the timeliness of hearings. In the 2001 Legislative Session, the Department of Human Resources proposed changes to the Juvenile Court Code to clarify the Final Rule requirements regarding the judicial determination of "reasonable efforts to finalize the permanency plan" at permanency hearings held every 12 months (as long as the child remains in care). However, the proposed change failed to be introduced. Efforts are already underway to ensure passage in the 2002 Session so that our compliance with timeliness and required judicial findings in permanency hearings will not be adversely affected. Statewide data regarding permanency hearings and their effectiveness is not available. However, Georgia SACWIS will enhance the state's capacity to report data and to determine how effectively permanent outcomes for children are being achieved. Presently, monitoring is possible at the county department level through the use of the Placement Supervisory Guide and the Evaluation and Reporting Review Guide. Both instruments provide case managers and supervisory staff with information concerning the timeliness of hearings, the identification of the permanency plan in the court order and the reasonable efforts finding to finalize the permanency plan in effect. The "Review/Custody Due/Expired" report is designed to serve as a tickler and enhance case management. With full implementation of the online case plan, there will be greater uniformity concerning the permanency plan, agency efforts to achieve permanency and compelling reasons (where required). These improvements will better drive the permanency hearing process and ensure greater consistency when the court reviews the county department's steps to achieve permanency for the child. Another anticipated improvement is already underway. In partnership with representatives of the Division's legal staff, Special Assistant Attorneys General and Juvenile Court Judges, current model orders will be re-designed to facilitate the hearing process and to address required documentation including appropriate findings of the court.

   5. Citing any data available to the State, discuss how the State meets the requirement to provide foster parents, pre-adoptive parents, and relative caregivers of children in foster care with notice of and an opportunity to be heard in, any review or hearing held with respect to the child in their care.

   There is no mechanism in place at the current time to track the notice requirements to foster parents, pre-adoptive parents and relatives. The individual case record would be the only source of documentation to determine whether this requirement is being met; i.e., via a copy of the written notice, case plan signatures, etc. The Placement Supervisory Guide and the Evaluation and Reporting Review Guide provide the only other monitoring mechanisms available at the county level. Citizen Panel and Administrative Reviews routinely invite the child's caregiver to any review concerning the child. However, the Adoption and Safe Families Act (hereinafter ASFA) extends such notice requirements to any hearing in which permanency for the child is being determined. There are no uniform procedures in the state regarding the manner in which notifications for hearings are handled. Sometimes, it is the role of county department staff to personally serve the individual. In other judicial circuits, the court or the Special Assistant Attorney General is responsible. While State law [O.C.G.A. § 15-11-58 (k) and (n)] requires notifications for reviews and hearings, it is silent in terms of prescribing "how" the notices are handled. Georgia may need to look at ways to ensure that notices are handled consistently and in a manner that can better document participation.

   3. Quality Assurance System

   1. Discuss how the State has complied with the requirement at section 471 (a)(22) of the Social Security Act to develop and implement standards to ensure that children in foster care placements are provided quality services that protect their health and safety, and any effects of implementing the standards to date.

   In Georgia, a Quality Assurance review process of Social Services programs began in 1991. Every year this process has been updated based on the trends and findings of the county reviews. We have conducted general, broad based annual reviews of all 159 county departments as well as targeted reviews specifically in Foster Care and Child Protective Services. Results, based on case sampling, were shared at the county and state level. The county departments were required to develop a Quality Improvement Plan based on the recommendations made in the annual review. Although these reviews identified critical issues and made recommendations for improvement, they were not always responded to or implemented by the county departments. In February 2000 the Evaluation and Reporting Section (hereinafter E & R) and the Social Services Section in conjunction with the Consultant and Support Unit implemented the Child Safety Initiative in Fulton County. This was prompted by media attention focused on the safety of children during the delivery of social services by DFCS. In April 2000, this initiative was expanded to other county departments. (See attached schedule). The Child Safety Initiative was developed to emphasize child welfare programs and management issues within the Division of Family and Children Services. The E & R Social Services Section developed new review criteria that included an expanded review manual, a new review format and guides based on policy standards to include more elements related to safety and permanency factors. The reviews focus on child safety, permanency for children and funding issues that impact service delivery. County Departments are required to develop a corrective action plan within 30 days to address findings and recommendations. The DFCS Director charged all Field Directors, County Directors and related Social Services staff to respond in a timely manner to E & R review findings and to assure that corrective action was implemented. County management staff are required to present their corrective action plans to the Division Director, Social Services Director, Evaluation and Reporting Section Director, as well as to other state level management staff.

   2. Discuss the effectiveness of the agency's quality assurance system in helping to ensure safety, permanency, and well-being for children served by the agency and their families in all jurisdictions of the State. In responding, discuss the jurisdictions in the State covered by the quality assurance procedures, the capacity of the system to evaluate the adequacy and quality of the State's child and family services system, and its capacity to produce information leading to program improvements.

   In 1991 the Department developed a review process for social service programs to assess the management of DFCS service operations for the 159 county DFCS offices in Georgia. The review process and accountability was expanded in February 2000 through the Child Safety Initiative. The expanded review process includes extensive program evaluation by a team of experienced, professional staff. The program evaluation of individual cases uses a written review guide to include: - 100% case record review of all on-going Child Protective Service cases. - 100% case record review of all active Foster Care cases - 100% case record review of all active Foster Homes - 50% case record review of : - Initial Investigations (100% were reviewed in high profile counties Fulton , Polk, Barrow and Gwinnett ) - Screened Out Child Protective Service referrals - Children Free for Adoption As each case is reviewed in either foster care or child protective service cases, a final determination is made on the guide to denote one of the following that best reflects case activity: Appropriate action taken to ensure child safety, Attention indicated for record keeping issues, Attention indicated for case management practice, and Immediate attention indicated for child safety issues. Adoption cases and foster home cases are also reviewed using similar determination criteria. Each day, in the cases identified as child safety issues, the case record and a copy of the review guide is provided to the Consultation and Support staff assigned to the agency, the agency management staff and the Evaluation and Reporting Social Services Unit. Data is collected daily on the status of all cases and results are sent to the Unit Manager for a statistical profile of trends. At the completion of each agency's review, the review team discusses and analyzes findings and compiles a written report with recommendations. This report provides detailed information about the safety of children, a summary of the action taken on immediate attention cases, policy violations, case management standards, organizational and management issues. The final report is presented in an exit conference as a comprehensive assessment of the agency's management and delivery of social services to children and families in the community. Each DFCS agency has responsibility for developing a formal corrective action plan within 30 days of the presentation of the written report. The plan is presented to the Director of Social Services, the Evaluation & Reporting Social Services Unit Manager, the Consultation and Support Unit Manager and other related state office staff. Implementation of the plan is monitored by the area Field Director and Consultation and Support personnel.

   4. Staff and Provider Training

   1. Citing any data available to the State on the numbers and timeframes of staff trained, discuss the effectiveness of the State's initial and ongoing training for all child welfare staff employed by the agency that includes the basic skills and knowledge required for their positions.

   Training for New Case Managers Required training courses are delivered by a contract provider. Training consists of a two-week basic course, required of all case managers before they can handle a case. The two-week course is followed by one week of on-the-job training in the local office and either basic program track on Child Protective Services or Child Placement Services. The separate program tracks were initiated in November of 1998. Within 18 months of employment, new case managers are required to complete four additional courses. The four courses are (1) Developing and Writing Case Plans, (2) Interviewing for Change, (3) Focusing on Substance Abuse in Families (1998), and (4) Toward Cultural Responsiveness (1998). The number of new workers attending the two-week basic course dropped from 1242 in FFY `98 to 717 in FFY `00. It would appear that the greater the turnover, the fewer new hires attended required training. Additional data is needed to determine the reason(s) for the drop in new workers attending required training. An average of 91 percent of the workers who attend the two-week basic course return for the program track training. Also, CPS case managers comprised 58 to 60 percent of the new hires in training in 1999 and 2000. Because we did not have separate program tracks before those years, we cannot determine the ratio of case managers attending training for new hires. Training for Supervisors New social services supervisors are required to complete Basic Supervision, Coaching and Managing Diversity. The number of supervisors completing Coaching averages 25; however, the number completing Basic Supervision ranges from 91 in FFY 99 to 32 in 2000. We have experienced increasing turnover among supervisors, and the decrease in those attending required courses may indicate difficulty recruiting new supervisors, or it may indicate overload in the duties of supervisors and a conscious decision they could not be spared to attend the training. Additional courses provided by agency staff trainers include Documentation (advanced course), Evaluating Case Plans for Successful Outcomes, Evaluating Assessments for Successful Outcomes and Separation and Loss Issues in Placement. Each quarter, the division provides Basic Investigative Training and Education (BITE)) for case managers and supervisors. Subject matter experts present these courses in four areas of the state. Participants number up to 200 at each site. Additional courses available to supervisors include Strategic Planning, Substance Abuse Intervention, Stress Management, Evaluating Case Plans for Successful Outcomes and Evaluating Assessments for Successful Outcomes. Also, the division contracts with the University of Georgia's Carl Vincent Institute of Government to provide Leadership Excellence in DFCS in each field management area of the state. Agency staff train on Seven Habits of Highly Successful People and Four Roles of Leadership by request. We contract to provide Communicating with the Media and Mediation Skills, on a first come, first served basis, in order of priority, to county directors and deputies, supervisors and other staff. Additional courses provided by agency staff trainers include Documentation (advanced course), Evaluating Case Plans for Successful Outcomes, Evaluating Assessments for Successful Outcomes and Separation and Loss Issues in Placement. In addition to completing new supervisory training, counties can request assistance from the Division's Social Services Supervisory Mentor Unit to work one-on-one with their new supervisors. The primary objective of the Unit is to orient and educate new social service supervisors to their role as first line managers. In addition to reviewing applicable program specific policy and procedure, the Mentors work closely with new supervisors to enhance their initial administrative and supervisory skills. The Mentors can be assigned to any of the 159 county DFCS offices to provide mentor services. The average assignment takes between eight to ten days to complete and follows a formal entrance between the Mentor, Consultation and Support Consultant and the local County Director. In concert with the Consultant and County Director, the Mentor identifies the strengths and needs of the new supervisor and establishes the goals and objectives of the mentoring assignment.

   2. Citing any data available to the State, discuss the effectiveness of the State's training of current and prospective foster and adoptive families and the staff of State-licensed or approved child care institutions that care for children in the State's care or responsibility that addresses the skills and knowledge base needed to carry out their duties.

   Georgia does not have the capability for monitoring the effectiveness of the State's training for prospective foster and adoptive families and child care institutions. The Division requires prospective foster and adoptive parents, approved through the county DFCS office, to participate in Group Preparation Selection-Model Approach To Partnerships In Parenting (GPS:MAPP). This is a preparation program that consists of a series of 10 sessions totaling 30 classroom hours. These sessions offer an opportunity for the parents to learn about a variety of topics pertinent to the foster care and adoption experience, including the impact of fostering and adoption on their family and behavior management techniques. Once approved, foster and foster/adopt resources must receive 15 hours of training annually in order to remain an agency approved home. The state provides training through the annual Adoptive and Foster Parent Conference and the quarterly regional training institutes designed to build upon and enhance the parenting skills of foster parents. During calendar year 1997, 628 foster parents and 44 staff received training via the Parent Development Institutes, with an increase to 712 foster parents and 222 staff during 1999. During 1997, 900 foster parents and staff attended the annual Foster and Adoptive Parent training conference. The number of attendees has grown steadily: 1998 - 950; 1999 - 1000; and 2000 - 1100. In February 2001 the attendance was at an all time high of 1432. In addition The Horizons Institutes, which are also open to foster and adoptive families, is another way for resources to obtain the necessary training hours. Finally, the Office of Adoptions offers an annual conference for adoptive families called "The Ties That Bind." It is geared toward adoptive parenting issues. DFCS's Social Services Section identifies staff training needs in response to federal and State laws and best practices. During 1999, approximately 180 resource development staff participated in a training workshop sponsored by the National Foster Care Resource Center in the recruitment and retention of foster parents. An annual supervisor's training conference is held to meet the needs of supervisors, where approximately 450 social service supervisors are trained in updated policies and practices as well as management skills. Additionally, a training conference is held with placement workers and private providers, where approximately 400 staff are trained to better serve the needs of children and families. In 2000, a training conference for resource development workers was held to improve staff skills in recruitment and retention of foster and adoptive families. The Division recognizes that adoption represents a lifetime commitment. The process does not end with finalization. At any stage throughout his or her life, the adoptee and the adoptive family may have recurring issues, questions or needs. In an effort to address these issues, the Office of Adoptions offers a variety of post-adoption services and training. These services are designed to increase the knowledge base and skills of adoptive families and provide training on topics related to adoption and the parenting of adopted children. In addition, the Department developed a post-adoption services handbook to assist adoptive parents and professionals working with adoptive families in obtaining the support and information needed to maintain healthy adoptive families. The Department also recognized the need for effective training for adoption staff. In response to this need, the Office of Adoptions implemented training in two Adoption Best Practices curriculums in partnership with Spaulding for Children, the National Resource Center on Special Needs Adoptions. The two curriculums were: Adoption Support and Preservation (ASAP) and Child Assessment and Preparation (CAP). The ASAP curriculum provided 250 statewide resource development staff from DFCS, SOA and contracted agencies with training on providing post adoption services that will decrease the likelihood of disruptions and dissolution in adoptive families. The CAP curriculum provided 250 adoption placement staff with training on assessing and preparing children for adoption. In the year 2000 there were 18 training events strategically located throughout the state for accessibility and optimal learning conditions. The finale for each curriculum was a Train-the-Trainers seminar which provides for continuing the training on a quarterly basis so that each new employee has access to training on adoption best practice within three months of their employment. There are currently 25 staff in the Office of Adoptions, DFCS and private contractual agencies who are trained and certified to provide ASAP and CAP training. In addition, the Office of Adoptions is currently developing an "Adoption 101" policy curriculum that should be available to staff throughout the state beginning the fall of 2001. Training is also available to staff from the public and private agencies every other month through the Horizon Institutes. Horizons offers training through videoconferences, which are designed to increase the professional knowledge and skills of adoption professionals. Nationally known experts provide information and discussion on topics from current issues in adoption to the parenting of adopted children. An annual statewide training seminar sponsored by the Office of Adoptions is another opportunity for staff from both the public and private sector to be trained on issues of both policy and practice. DFCS provides additional training to staff in annual conferences centered around resource development and placement issues from both a policy and practice standpoint. For child placing agencies, licensed by DHR, the Department requires the completion of job-related training annually by all supervisory and social service staff members, whether employees or contracted staff. Fifteen hours of training is required for staff employed more than 20 hours per week and seven hours of training for those employed 20 hours or less per week. For child caring institutions licensed by DHR, required training must include instruction in child abuse policies and procedures, reporting requirements for suspected cases of child abuse, policies and procedures for handling medical emergencies, and physical control techniques. Additional training must include 24 clock hours of formal, annual training in child care issues related to the employee's job assignment and to the type of services provided by the institution. Provider Orientation: Georgia DFCS is one of the agencies that participates in conducting a multi-agency provider orientation for private agencies interested in providing residential care and foster care. This public/private partnership is a joint effort of the Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ); the Division of Mental Health, Mental Retardation, and Substance Abuse (DMHMRSA); the Office of Regulatory Services (ORS); and the Georgia Association of Homes and Services for Children (GAHSC). Requirements for Training: Georgia DFCS places children with private agencies that are licensed by our Department of Human Resources' ORS as Child Placing Agencies (CPA's) or Child Caring Institutions (CCI's). The licensing rules and regulations require training of staff and foster parents. CCI staff receive training prior to working with children and on-going training (24 hours per year). Foster parents are trained before they are approved for the placement of children and receive annual training of at least 15 hours (if caring for children over the age of 12 months) or at least 8 hours (if caring for children 12 months of age or younger). Social services and supervisory staff in the CPA's are required to have 15 hours of job-related training annually. MATCH Standards: In addition to the training provided according to the licensing rules and regulations, those private agencies providing therapeutic services have additional training requirements. The programmatic standards for the Multi-Agency Team for Children (MATCH) program require training for staff in residential treatment programs and for staff and foster parents providing therapeutic foster care. Residential Treatment programs are required to have a staff development plan which includes orientation of new staff, assessment of training needs, and 45 hours in-service training per year. Among the topics covered in the training are: normal child and adolescent development; behavioral and emotional problems typical of the youth referred to the program; behavior dynamics and treatment needs of children who have been neglected and/or abused; effects of separation on children and an understanding of attachment issues; developing individualized service plans; consistent, sound behavior management techniques; and cultural competence and culturally responsive services. Therapeutic Foster Care programs are required to meet the same staff development standards for their staff. Therapeutic foster parents, both partners of a couple and the respite parents, receive 36 hours of training (GPS:MAPP plus six additional hours) before children are placed with them. Therapeutic foster parents receive in-service training of at least 24 hours in addition to the pre-service training during their first year as foster parents. After the first year and each year thereafter, the primary foster parent must have a minimum of 45 hours of in-service training per year. After one year of work as a therapeutic foster parent, the training requirement for the secondary foster parent spouse and respite parents is reduced to 24 hours per year

   5. Service Array and Resource Development

   1. Discuss how effective the State has been in meeting the title IV-B State plan requirement to provide services designed to help children safely and appropriately return to families from which they have been removed.

   Maintaining children with their own families and family reunification are the preferred permanency planning options for all children in Georgia state custody. To support county level authority to plan and coordinate services for children and families with a plan of safe, appropriate and timely reunification, Promoting Safe and Stable Families Mini-Grants are allocated statewide. Since FFY 1998 counties have utilized these additional resources to support the purchase of direct and wrap around reunification services for children in state custody. Timely professional interventions and supports such as family conferencing is a key objective to engage parents and their natural supports early in the permanency planning process. Activities may include community-based family visitation and professional interventions provided by licensed mental health and substance abuse treatment professionals services are provided to families to assure that informed decisions can be made by case managers and courts about parental capacity to safely care for their children. Our goal is to help parents safely care for their children, prevent the trauma of separation and placement, and enable families to carry on with support and without costly and often recurring involvement with the child welfare system. Efforts to assure safe and permanent reunifications for children are often complicated by the complex and interrelated problems many families experience, such as poverty, unemployment, poor housing, substance abuse, domestic violence and mental illness. The degree to which we are effective in reuniting families has been largely dependent upon our ability to connect families with timely and appropriate supports and service resources from various agencies, community-based organizations, and other formal and informal supports within their own communities. Since FFY 1995, DHR, through a statewide Request for Proposal process has contracted with community-based agencies to provide children and families with an individualized array of comprehensive, coordinated, family centered and community-based services and supports. Of the 125 agencies funded during the FFY 1999 cycle, twenty-one were funded to provide Time Limited Reunification Services to help prevent foster care placement, promote safe, timely and appropriate reunification and provide in-home follow up support to families whose children have been returned from foster care. Child welfare trends as reflected in AFCARS data indicated that between April 1, 1998 and March 31, 1999, approximately 32% of the children in care were removed from the home due to parental drug or alcohol abuse. Time Limited Reunification services have been particularly effective in safely reunifying families separated due to parental substance abuse. In FFY 1999 services to substance abusing mothers and their children increased through the expansion of treatment and post-treatment support services, funded through the Promoting Safe and Stable Families (PSSF) Program. To remove barriers to treatment and sustain successful treatment outcomes in court mandated child deprivation cases, the Division contracts with residential and day substance abuse treatment providers to provide intensive, time-limited Post-Substance Abuse Treatment and Transitional Support services to pregnant and parenting women. Residential Treatment Aftercare teams comprised of the case manager, family members, treatment and other service providers create an individualized, realistic and appropriate plan for transition to sober, independent living and reunification. Mothers successfully completing treatment are reunited with their children, and are allowed to continue parenting as they learn new parenting, coping and independent living skills in a safe and supervised environment from six to nine months. Issues such as, relapse support and prevention, housing, employment, education, child care, financial planning and transportation are addressed to ensure that recovering mothers and their children receive essential post treatment support services. Programs like Gateway Cottage in Houston, Georgia credit a 45% reduction in relapse rate to PSSF funding for aftercare programming. From July 1, 1998 through April 30, 1999 Cobb County DFCS reported that 55% of their TPR cases were related to substance abuse by the primary care giver, the majority of which are headed by single females. Seventy-six percent of the referrals to Cobb County Community Services Board's Mother's Making A Change Program now come from DFCS CPS, with an additional 13% coming from the Juvenile and Family Court Systems. Since parent and child visitation is essential to successful reunification, county departments have been encouraged to utilize Promoting Safe and Stable Families (PSSF) funded Family Visitation Centers or to contract with neutral, community based agencies and institutions to provide supervised family interaction and enrichment activities in private settings for children in state custody and their families. To establish or sustain parent-child relations and facilitate permanency planning, barriers to consistent visitation are removed through expanded and non-traditional hours of operation and transportation services. Key to success at the program level is parent participation in the planning of all activities. Over 200 families have been served since FFY 1999. Residential After-Care Programs have been funded in several regions of the state to support the families of children returning home from residential treatment or therapeutic foster home settings. Services include comprehensive discharge planning, intensive case management, in-home family therapy, crisis intervention and coordination of community supports and resources. These services are made available to families for a minimum of six to twelve months following discharge and return home. At this time we do not know how many families are still tact.

   2. Discuss how effective the State has been in meeting the title IV-B State plan requirement to provide pre-placement preventive services designed to help children at risk of foster care placement remain safely with their families.

   Refer to Section IV, Question B2 on page 40 of this Statewide Assessment for a listing and explanation of family preservation services/pre-placement preventive services. Early Intervention/Prevention Services, Parent Aide Services, Homestead Services and Prevention of Unnecessary Placement all provide a continuum of services designed to prevent unnecessary foster care and/or supports reunification of children back to families. Early Intervention/Prevention Services is Georgia's most recent endeavor toward meeting the Title IV-B state plan. It began in Georgia FY 2001. This intervention provides paraprofessional support to families with stressful, non CPS issues to address and is intended to help prevent situations that might otherwise deteriorate into a CPS situation. Additional policy was added to the CPS section of the Social Services Manual in 2000 that requires the consideration of a referral to Early Intervention for families who have been assessed to have a low risk of future maltreatment and for those who have been active with CPS ongoing services but who have made sufficient progress for case closure. Having this extra resource available for a family that has reached case plan goals will provide the family with an extra buffer to help with the transition from active CPS involvement. Funds for all four prevention programs in Georgia are available to all 159 counties. Counties are responsible for establishing MOU's with local vendors for the provision of targeted services to families. Funds for the Prevention of Unnecessary Placement Program (PUP) are available to counties for the direct purchase of services, which includes emergency help with housing, temporary child care, drug screens, substance abuse assessments, emergency medical/dental needs, etc. Approximately eighty-six percent of children in families helped through use of PUP funding have remained out of state placement. Approximately seventy-five percent of PUP funding goes to families with an open CPS case for the purpose of prevention of placement. Approximately twenty-five percent of PUP funds goes to families for reunification efforts of placing children in foster care back with the family. Available funding for preventive programs has increased over the years through allocations that have utilized TANF, tobacco and state monies. For Georgia FY 2000, these programs served 3,914 families. Numbers are not yet available for families served by Early Intervention/Preventive Services.

   3. Discuss how effective the State has been in meeting the title IV-B State plan requirement to provide services designed to help children be placed for adoption, with a legal guardian, or if adoption or legal guardianship are determined not to be appropriate for a child, in some other planned, permanent living arrangement.

   The Department of Human Resources, through both the Division of Family and Children Services and the Office of Adoptions, provides aggressive leadership through policy that is fully compliant with ASFA towards the goal of moving children rapidly toward permanency. The Child Assessment and Preparation curriculum was offered and will continue to be offered to public and private agency staff in an effort to provide the adoption professional with the tools to ready children for permanent placements. Funds are set aside each year to allow county departments to contract out the work of putting together a child's Life History so that paperwork will not be a barrier to moving a child through the system. In early 2001, adoption data and matching management reports began to be distributed to the field to support better tracking of children who are at least partially free for adoption. Since 1997, contracts with private agencies to recruit and develop adoptive and foster/adoptive homes for Georgia's waiting children has grown from 2 to 10 agencies producing a total of 558 resources for Georgia's children. Additionally, a federal grant for the `Tale of Two States' is enabling Georgia to explore more effective ways of promoting and supporting cross-jurisdictional placements in an effort to increase placement opportunities for our waiting children. Aggressive child specific recruitment services are provided to those children who have no identified adoptive resource at the point that the concurrent plan becomes adoption or at the point they become partially free for adoption. Policy requires that children be registered with Georgia's photolisting book, My Turn Now, no later than the point that the child's Life History is completed and registered with the Georgia Adoption Exchange (within 60 days of the first free date according to policy). Those children who are registered with My Turn Now are quickly and routinely also featured on the agency's adoption website www.adoptions.dhr.state.ga.us. Matching services are routinely provided by the Office of Adoptions Exchange in an effort to match waiting children with waiting families. It is routine practice to also register waiting children who have been listed in the My Turn Now book and website for 3 months and who are still without a resource in the SEEUS book, the Children Awaiting Parents photo listing book, the Faces of Adoption Website, and National Adoption Exchange. Policy under development will soon require these registrations to be completed at the time of registration of the child's Life History. Additional child specific recruitment opportunities provided to Georgia's waiting children are through video-conferenced matching parties (every other month); regional galas; and an annual statewide adoption Matching meeting. Waiting children are regularly featured in the DFCS newsletter, Journey of Hope newsletter, and Parent to Parent newsletter, as well as various regional newspapers. A partnership with the Freddie Mac Foundation, DHR, and Fox 5 News enabled Georgia to continue a fledgling series on waiting children into a regular Wednesday's child feature in late 2000. While staff turnover and lack of specialization hamper effectiveness in this area, strategies have been developed to reverse this trend. A proposal to develop specialized units for resource development and adoption placement work is under consideration and if approved should increase Georgia's ability to provide services necessary to move children and resource families more effectively through the system. Currently, in many smaller Georgia counties, a case manager is expected to know and provide all types of adult and child welfare services.

   4. Describe the extent to which all the services in items 1-3 above are accessible to families and children on a statewide basis.

   State and federal resources are allocated statewide to support services. Through 159 county DFCS offices, the Office of Adoptions provides adoption services to every child in the permanent custody of DHR in need of a permanent safe home. The Department also contracts with various private agencies located throughout the state to provide adoption services in their areas. Additionally, the Office of Adoptions uses Georgia's Statewide Academic and Medical System (GSAMS), a two-way interactive network, to conduct adoption videoconferences. Also available are a statewide photo listing book, My Turn Now, and an adoptions website. The availability of these resources provides children and families throughout the state access to services without restrictions of time or distance. Foster home services are available statewide through the 159 local county DFCS offices. All placement and resource development workers are required to have MAPP training in order to prepare families to foster and adopt. Private agencies providing homes for children in DFCS custody are also encouraged to have their staff complete the training sessions for preparing their foster and adoptive families.

   6. Agency Responsiveness to Community

   1. Discuss how effective the State has been in meeting the requirement to consult and coordinate with external community stakeholders in the development of the State's Child and Family Services Plan (CFSP). In responding, discuss how the concerns of stakeholders are addressed in the agency's planning and operations and their involvement in evaluating and reporting progress on the agency's goals.

   In the past, the State has not always utilized community stakeholders to the fullest extent possible; however, in recent years, we have done a lot to correct the underutilization of community stakeholders. Stakeholders have been involved in planning, evaluating and reshaping the way families experience child welfare services in Georgia. Nowhere is that involvement more apparent than in the child Protective Services Task Force that was convened by Commissioner of DHR, Audrey Horne, in January of 2000. Commissioner Horne appointed 15 independent Task Force members, including state and national experts, as well as three subcommittees with 75 members from across the state to make recommendations about all issues from within and without DFCS that would improve the State's ability to protect Georgia's children. The Task Force held 33 public meetings in 11 cities and heard in person from over 1200 citizens. Additionally, written comments were received from another 1,500 citizens. Twenty-one recommendations were made in five major areas. ( see attached recommendations and listing of Task Force members) Many of these task force members have continued their involvement with the Division in working to implement Task Force recommendations and advocating with the Governor and members of the legislature to implement them since the Task Force concluded. The support of this Task Force greatly assisted the Division in obtaining funds to implement many of the major recommendations. (See childwelfare.net) The advisory committees, Child First and First Placement/Best Placement (FP/BP), continued to provide stakeholder input, assistance in planning and evaluating for the Promoting Safe and Stable Families Program and FP/BP program during the year. It also met the IV-B requirement to consult and coordinate with external community stakeholders. This year their input will be vital to the expansion of First Placement/Best Placement. Membership on the committees will continue to be varied in order to secure new perspectives, as well as assure continuity in program development. The Child Welfare Advisory Committee is an expansion of the Child First Committee developed to get community stakeholders' input in the State's Child and Family Services Plan. The Children's Justice Act Advisory Committee assumes a lead role in advising the Division on the work with other partners in the medical, judicial , and law enforcement community to increase the effectiveness of the investigation and prosecution of child abuse. The Advisory Committee recommends projects of statewide importance for funding when those projects demonstrate a collaborative and interagency approach. (see attached for current membership listing) The Children's Justice Act Advisory Committee has developed programs designed to improve the handling of child abuse cases, the handling of cases of suspected child abuse or neglect related fatalities and the investigation and prosecution of cases of child abuse. Georgia's membership includes a parent representative, a Superior Court judge, Fulton County Sheriff's department, a district attorney, the Prosecuting Attorney's Council of Georgia, the Division of Mental Health and Retardation, a Georgia Court Appointed Special Advocate, police, Georgia Department of Corrections, hospital, Family Resource Planning, Emory Law School, Developmental Disability Programs, medical examiner, a child advocate and the Georgia Indigent Defense Council. This panel meets quarterly and, among it grants approval and review responsibilities, it reviews CPS policy and makes recommendations regarding policy, practice and training. Foster Care reform in Georgia has been underway for four years. This initiative, First Placement/Best Placement, seeks to transform out of home services to children and their families by developing an extensive network of community stakeholders and providers in order to insure that children are placed within their families and communities if at all possible and that services are provided to children and families to remedy the root causes of abuse and neglect and minimize the impact on children. Those children who cannot be safely returned to their own homes are moved into adoption or another permanent plan as quickly as possible. In 2000, adoptions were finalized on over 800 children. First Placement/Best Placement has over 100 providers statewide and is now in every county in Georgia. Central to the success of this effort has been the Division's partnership with the Georgia Association of Homes and Services for Children (GAHSC) and the Georgia Foster Parent Association. Many GAHSC members have expanded their residential programs to include working with families in their own homes, so that children can be safely returned to these home. Foster parents have adopted more than 80% of those children in foster care who have been freed for adoption. The Georgia Supreme Court Child Placement project has taken the leadership in implementing a common case plan for Georgia's children in state custody. This plan is developed jointly by DFCS and the court and both have input and access to the plan through an on-line database shared by both agencies. Georgia DFCS contracts with over 200 providers statewide to deliver services to children and families. These services include prevention activities as well as services designed to remedy the causes of abuse and neglect in families and treat the effects of abuse on children. Family Support and Early Intervention Services are voluntary services provided by community partners to families who may be experiencing problems but not serious enough to rise to the level of abuse and neglect that requires CPS intervention. Services include parent advocacy and home-based parent education, substance abuse treatment and support services, and relative caregiver support programs. Family Preservation Services are provided by community providers to families who are in crisis or at risk of having a child removed from the home or to support a recent reunification. These services include therapeutic/crisis intervention, residential after-care and relative caregiver support programs. Time Limited Reunification services are direct services provided to a child with the plan of reunification and to the child's parents or caregivers. These include professional intervention and support, family visitation centers, and post-substance abuse treatment and transitional support services. (partial listing attached) Georgia DFCS is currently demonstrating partnerships with the faith-based community in several areas of the state as we seek to recruit resources for children freed for adoption and resources for older children to enable them to successfully emancipate from foster care. (partial listing attached)

   2. Discuss how effective the State has been in meeting the State plan requirement to coordinate its services with the services and benefits of other public and private agencies serving the same general populations of children and families.

   Since 1995, Georgia has demonstrated significant success with its community-based RFP process involving key stakeholders from around the state in the design of Promoting Safe and Stable Families (PSSF) Program Services, review of proposals and in the delivery and coordination of services. The approach has proven effective in improving local service delivery coordination and has strengthened pubic/private partnerships with traditional and non-traditional child and family service agencies serving the same general population of children and families. To encourage shared responsibility at the community level for protecting children and supporting families, Promoting Safe and Stable Families Requests for Proposals to provide family support, family preservation, time limited reunification and adoption promotion and foster care transitional support services have been solicited from state government agencies, other public and private non-profit entities and from public/private collaborative partnerships statewide. Continued development and implementation of this framework for system and service delivery reform will provide Georgia's children and families' seamless access to quality, timely and non-duplicative family support and child welfare services in their own communities. From FFY 1995 through FFY 2000, four hundred seventy (470) contracts have been awarded to community-based organizations, increasing family access to services in more than sixty (60) counties throughout the state. Significant funding has been concentrated in the five county metropolitan Atlanta area as evidenced by approximately 47% of the funding allocated to community based programs in Cobb, DeKalb, Douglas, Fulton and Gwinnett counties. The concentration of family supportive resources in this five county urban environment is commensurate with the 50% of the state's population, which is concentrated in the greater metropolitan area. During the FFY 1999 funding cycle, 125 public and private agencies were funded. With the support of federal PSSF funding, comprehensive school or community based support services to adolescent or teen mothers, fathers and their parents have been expanded. Domestic violence shelter services were expanded or enhanced throughout the state to increase the accessibility of supportive services for victims and child witnesses of domestic abuse. Substance abuse treatment programs serving pregnant and parenting women were expanded with focus on the independent living and parenting skills of substance abusing mothers to promote drug-free, self-sufficient lives for themselves and their children. University based programs are providing comprehensive health, family and legal services to grandparents and relative caregivers of children other then their own. Funded PSSF program services continue to be delivered in-home, as well as in a variety of community based settings including family resource centers, substance abuse treatment centers, domestic violence shelters, churches, police departments, schools, hospitals, college and universities. The MATCH Program: Georgia DFCS manages the Multi-Agency Team for Children (MATCH) program. MATCH arranges care for Georgia's most severely emotionally disturbed children. It is truly multi-agency - serving children from DMHMRSA, DFCS, and DJJ. MATCH is administered by DFCS, but decisions about the treatment children receive and the providers enrolled are made by the multi-agency team. There are more than 100 local multi-agency teams where all options are considered and decisions are made for referral to state MATCH. MATCH is a public/private partnership - 95% of MATCH placements are with the private sector. MATCH provides an array in-state treatment options including therapeutic foster care, therapeutic group homes, sexual offender treatment, assessment centers, outdoor therapeutic programs, and residential treatment centers. The public/private MATCH continuum successfully met its goal of serving children in Georgia - MATCH has no children placed out of state. MATCH serves children without regard to custody - parents are able to receive needed services for their children without considering giving up custody. The public and private agencies that are part of the MATCH team jointly designed and implemented an outcome system to measure the effectiveness of the program in helping children improve their functioning and return to their families and communities. GAHSC/State Agency Liaison Committee: Georgia DFCS co-chairs with the private agency association, Georgia Association of Homes and Services for Children (GAHSC), a quarterly public/private liaison committee. The GAHSC/State Agency Liaison Committee meets quarterly to address and resolve issues of common concern to our public and private agencies and to keep the lines of communication open. Provider Orientation: Georgia DFCS participates in the multi-agency new provider orientation discussed in the response to D.2. Mental Health Planning and Advisory Council: Georgia DFCS participates in the Georgia Mental Health Planning and Advisory Council.

   3. Does the agency have any agreements in place with other public or private agencies or contractors, such as juvenile justice or managed care agencies, to perform title IV-E or IV-B functions? If so, how are services provided under the agreements or contracts monitored for compliance with State plan requirements or other program requirements and accurate eligibility determinations made, where applicable?

   Georgia DFCS purchases IV-E room and board services from private providers of foster care and residential/group care. The providers are monitored for adherence to licensing rules and regulations and programmatic standards. Eligibility determination is not delegated to the private providers; this responsibility is maintained by the county DFCS staff. The Division on behalf of its county departments also purchases direct Family Support, Family Preservation, Time-Limited Reunification and Adoption Promotion and Transitional Support Services from community-based child and family service agencies. Agencies proposing to provide these Promoting Safe and Stable Families Program services are required to review current child abuse and neglect data, trends and service needs with local DFCS departments to assure that funded services are responsive to the community and service referral needs of children and families served by DFCS CPS, Foster Care and Adoption Placement units. All proposals requesting continuation, enhancement or service expansion funding receive a two part qualitative review to assure compliance with current contractual and reporting compliance, service delivery, fiscal management and state audit requirements. Proposals accepted are monitored through monthly reports and annual site visits to the providers. Georgia is in the process of developing a state DFCS/DJJ Agreement. A local DFCS/DJJ Agreement has been developed in Fulton County. To promote service coordination and referrals, services agreements for funded proposals are negotiated by the Division and managed by county DFCS departments rather than the more traditional state level contracting structure. To facilitate full service integration and service utilization of contracted PSSF service providers, agencies are required to meet with county front line and supervisory staff to review program services and develop referral and feedback procedures. Providers of Family Preservation and Time Limited Reunification Services are also required to work in teams with agency staff to assure that provided services are responsive and effective in meeting agency identified needs as determined by child and family assessments and multi-disciplinary team staffings.

   4. Citing any data available, discuss how effective the State has been in meeting State plan requirements for determining whether children are American Indian and ensuring compliance with the Indian Child Welfare Act.

   There are no recognized tribes in Georgia. Georgia does not have any children who are American Indian in foster care. The state of Georgia's Foster Care and Adoptions Units comply with the Indian Child Welfare Act as evidenced in their respective policies. The American Indian Act of 1978 was enacted to address the alarming rate of removals of American Indian children from their homes for foster care and adoptive placements. The Act establishes standards as well as protocols for providing child welfare services. The Indian Child Welfare Act is included in training provided to casework staff and supervisors. Updates and attention to compliance is addressed at periodic trainings for social services supervisors at their annual meetings in the spring of each year. The last training efforts were in March 2001. The State assures the right for notice of and the right to intervene in state proceedings involving Native American children and utilizes tribal courts in Indian child welfare matters or works to transfer the court proceedings to appropriate tribal jurisdictions. If the identity or location of the parent or Indian custodian and the tribe cannot be determined, notice is given to the Secretary of the Interior to provide the notice to the parent or Indian custodian and the tribe. Any placements of Indian children are recorded and maintained per policy and include evidence with the efforts to comply with the order of preference of placement.

   7. Foster and Adoptive Home Licensing, Approval, and Recruitment

   1. Discuss how effective the State has been in meeting the requirement to establish and maintain standards for foster family homes, adoptive homes, and child care institutions in which children served by the agency are placed.

      The State, through the Office of Regulatory Services, has outlined rules and regulations for child placing agencies and child caring institutions. Regulators visit the facility at least annually and conduct a written review. They investigate any complaints as well as conduct follow-ups and monitoring visits. There is an adverse action procedure in place for facilities with serious offenses or repeat non-compliance. In addition, the Office of Adoptions has aggressively pursued contractual partnerships with licensed private agencies to provide recruitment, assessments, placement, supervision, post placement services and post adoption services to children in DHR custody. Contracting with these agencies increased from four contracts with four different agencies in 1995 to 23 contracts with 10 different agencies in 1999. The Office of Adoptions provides training and technical assistance to the agencies to assure that all DHR policies (in addition to the Rules and Regulations of Office of Regulatory Services) are strictly followed. The Office of Adoptions has a program consultant assigned specifically to oversee the programmatic component of the contract to assure all requirements and standards are met prior to approval and registering the home study. Placements cannot be made without State Office approval. All private agencies used by Georgia DFCS for the placement of children in our care must be licensed by our Department of Human Resources' Office of Regulatory Services (ORS) as a Child Caring Institution (CCI) if they provide group care to six or more children or as a Child Placing Agency (CPA) if they provide family foster care. In addition to the CCI or CPA license, private agencies are approved by DFCS for the placement of DFCS children. ORS conducts annual re-licensing visits and investigates complaints. All reports of ORS findings are forwarded to DFCS for review and consideration. ORS and DFCS meet on a monthly basis to share information about private agency issues, including strengths and needs that require follow-up or action. Serious complaints and rule violations frequently are investigated jointly by ORS and DFCS. Private agencies providing therapeutic services have additional programmatic standards. Therapeutic programs must be certified in compliance with the standards of the Multi-Agency Team for Children (MATCH) for the type(s) of service provided. The MATCH program certifies providers of therapeutic foster care, intermediate residential treatment, therapeutic wilderness programs, and intensive residential treatment. The certification of MATCH providers is done jointly by ORS and the MATCH team.

      2. Citing any data available to the State, discuss how effective the State has been in meeting the State plan requirement to ensure that the State's licensure standards are applied equally to all foster and adoptive homes and child care institutions that serve children in the State's care or custody.

      Georgia does not have any state level audit data on licensure standards. In developing the new child placing agency regulations that were effective April 5, 2000, the Department developed an advisory committee made up of private agencies, public agency representatives and private attorneys in an attempt to bring the public and private sector more in sync with requirements. The agency also meets with the Association of Child Care Institutions regularly to address various issues of all child caring institutions whether public or private. Adoptive homes developed through contracts with the Office of Adoptions are approved by specialists in the state office to insure compliance with standards for approval. All group homes and child caring institutions (whether private or operated by DFCS) are reviewed by ORS for compliance with the CCI rules and regulations. Although DFCS foster homes are approved by DFCS staff not ORS, ORS has developed its CPA rules and regulations to assure consistency with the DFCS policy under which its foster homes are approved. Related and non-related homes have the same approval standard pursuant to federal law.

      3. Citing any licensure or safety data available to the State, discuss how effective the State has been in meeting the State plan requirements to conduct criminal background clearances on prospective foster and adoptive families, including those being licensed or approved by private agencies in the State. How does the State address safety considerations with respect to the staff of child care institutions and foster and adoptive families (if the agency has opted not to conduct criminal background clearances on foster care and adoptive families)?

      Georgia does not have the capability for state level monitoring on criminal background clearances on prospective foster and adoptive families or those approved by private agencies in the state. Criminal records checks are done on all staff and potential parents, including staff of child placing agencies. ORS monitors the criminal checks for child placement agency staff. DHR policy requires a criminal record check, complete with fingerprints, for all adoptive and foster parents and all adults age 18 and over, residing in the home either permanently or temporarily, who have access to the children. The Georgia Crime Information Center performs the criminal background clearances. Any reported offenses must be fully explored with the parties involved. In accordance with ASFA guidelines, policy details the offenses for which an approval shall not be granted. Obtaining FBI clearances is an area DHR continues to pursue. Georgia licensing rules and regulations require: All private agencies must obtain satisfactory criminal records checks on prospective foster parents and any adults in the home 18 years of age or older prior to placing a child in the home. All private agencies providing group care must obtain satisfactory criminal records checks on the director and employees.

      4. Citing any data available to the State, discuss how effective the State has been in meeting the State plan requirement to recruit and retain foster and adoptive families that represent the ethnic and racial diversity of children in the State for whom foster and adoptive homes are needed, including the effectiveness of the State's official recruitment plan.

      In Georgia, 74% of available children needing adoptive placements are African American children. About 58% are male and about 42% are female. Many are part of sibling groups. As of April 2000 there were 281 children available for adoption who were without an identified resource. In an effort to bring a wide range of diversity to the pool of waiting families, the Department has contracted with various private agencies to provide for the diligent recruitment of potential foster and adoptive families who reflect the ethnic and racial diversity of children needing homes. Each county Department will submit annual recruitment plans and quarterly report to the DHR Office of Adoptions recruitment manager. Foster care has established a centralized intake and information line (1-888-310-8260) to respond to public inquiries about foster care and foster parent issues and concerns. Callers specifically expressing an interest in becoming foster parents are forwarded to counties and tracked as to their progress throughout the pre-service continuum (orientation/information, GPS/DT:MAPP, home study and approval). Statistics collected are used to determine strengths and needs of the approval process, as well as to provide data for required federal or state reports. A major responsibility is to assist counties with recruitment and to conduct on-going statewide recruitment campaigns to ensure adoptive homes and foster homes are available for the children coming into the temporary or permanent custody of the state. In order to ensure that adequate resources are available for waiting children throughout the state, recruitment activities include but are not limited to billboards, posters, specialty items, adoption galas, adoption parties, resource fairs, parades, Christmas trees decorated with photos of waiting children, foster care and adoption celebrations, adoption video conferencing where about 20-25 children are featured every other month and viewed by prospective families around the state of Georgia via satellite video system, adoption newsletters, the Office of Adoptions website, My Turn Now Photolisting, Wednesday's Child (Fox 5-WAGA-TV), adoption/foster care public relations contract, newsletters and other printed media. Many activities are designed for child specific recruitment. Many are designed for general recruitment and public awareness. The state office recruitment manager meets quarterly with the statewide recruitment committee to provide guidance and training and assistance in carrying out the recruitment plan for state workers and to ensure that recruitment is on-going and that recruitment is targeted to reach families likely to foster and adopt children in the permanent legal custody of the state. Monthly meetings were held with regional recruitment groups to develop strategies for enhancing recruitment efforts in nine metro Atlanta counties during the years 1998 through 2000. In FY 1999, 1,169 children were placed into adoptive placements. Approximately 83% of these children were adopted by their foster parents. Statewide Recruitment and Retention workshops, with added emphasis on retention were held in the year 2000 to address issues around the retention of foster homes. The workshops were attended by case work and supervisory staff, and foster parents throughout the state. The Adoptive and Foster Parents Association of Georgia, in collaboration with the division, sponsored a one-day Foster parent leadership Conference in 2000. The purpose of the conference was to strengthen the partnership between foster parents and DFCS at both the state and county levels. In an effort to support the maintenance and stability of foster care placements, a time-limited special funding for respite care has been established to augment the regular foster care respite care program. It is anticipated that continued funding will be established for this program. The Governor signs a yearly Proclamation in recognition of Foster Care Month (May) and National Adoption Month (November). A private public relations agency is developing a statewide recruitment plan for foster care and adoption. Various marketing strategies are being implemented to identify and profile families in communities throughout the state. "Geodemographics" or neighborhood lifestyle segmentation strategies are being used to identify neighborhoods or communities in which we might find existing foster families. The premise is that this will assist the agency in identifying future families (i.e., "The best customer for your product are your existing customers," and "Birds of a feather flock together.") General, targeted and child-specific recruitment strategies are used in recruiting foster and adoptive parents. Recruitment materials reflect the characteristics of children needing placements and the basic requirements for fostering or adopting. A MEPA-IEP statement of non-discrimination is imprinted on all recruitment materials. Both foster care and adoption have contracted with private child-placing agencies to recruit and develop foster and adoptive homes for the placement of children. A Faith in Families Program was established in 2000 to promote a partnership between the agency and the faith community in providing services to communities.

      5. Citing any data available to the State, discuss how effective the State has been in meeting the State plan requirement to recruit and use adoptive families for waiting children across State or other jurisdictional boundaries. In responding, consider relevant agency policies, timeframes for initiating recruitment activities, and specific methods.

      The Office of Adoptions uses a variety of activities to recruit adoptive families across state and other jurisdictional boundaries. Policy requires that "the county shall conduct child specific recruitment for any child in permanent custody who is waiting for an adoptive home and for whom no home is readily available in the state." Concurrent planning regarding the availability of an adoptive home shall also be done for a child on whose behalf a petition for Termination of Parental Rights (TPR) has been filed. Child specific recruitment in Georgia is the responsibility of both the county and state offices. It is the county case manager who provides information and pictures of children to the state office in order to initiate recruitment services. It is the responsibility of Georgia's Adoption Exchange to register each waiting child with the various national photolistings services and exchanges and to promote children through various other mediums (newsletters, TV, etc.) Meanwhile, case managers at the local level continue to promote children by taking them to galas, videoconferences, and by featuring them through local media. Many of the child specific recruitment methods employed in Georgia promote cross-jurisdictional placements as most methods provide statewide or national exposure of the waiting children. First, all available children are registered on the "My Turn Now" web-site which can be accessed by any family via the Internet. Once a family has identified a child for whom they have an interest, they can respond to a 1-800 number that directs their call to the appropriate person for further information. Also, our practice is to list children with SEEUS, FACES of Adoption, CAP and the National Adoption Center when resources are not readily available for waiting children. One activity that has been a very successful tool for strengthening the recruitment of families for waiting children intra-jurisdictionally takes place through Video Conference Matching Meetings held every other month through a contract with Lumpe & Frost. Approximately 22 available children come to a host site location. This site is rotated across the state so that children from all areas of Georgia are highlighted. Interested families attend at eight locations across the state. Through video conferencing (interactive TV), waiting children are introduced to families across the state. To date 177 children have been presented and 329 families attended. Interest has been expressed in 112 of the 177 children presented and over 35% of them have permanent resources identified. In addition, case managers across the state come together for mini matching meetings where they share information on available children and families. In an effort to address state barriers to placing children cross-jurisdictionally, the Office of Adoptions partnered with South Carolina in the Children's Bureau Adoption Opportunities Tale of Two States Research Project. Through this project the following barriers were identified: different reporting requirements by each state; lack of training; staff turnover; insufficient ICPC resources; staff attitudes related to interstate placements; workloads; and arrangement of pre-placement visitation of child and family. Georgia, through another Adoptions Opportunities Grant, will continue to collaborate with South Carolina, implementing a pilot project between the two states to address the barriers during the next three years. This project will also reach out to two other states during the time of the grant period. Because the project is still in the planning stages, the pilot has not yet been implemented. It is the plan of the Office of Adoptions to monitor the project and evaluate its outcomes for effectiveness. It is hoped that from the project a model will be developed for the nation to use to increase cross- jurisdictional adoptions. Further, the Office of Adoptions has contracted with a licensed, private adoption agency to process all interstate private agency and independent adoptions. Under the terms of the agreement, the contracted agency assumes responsibility for completing all home studies for out-of-state, public agency children when requested through the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children (ICPC). Through the contract, county departments are relieved of these responsibilities in an attempt to get studies of Georgia families adopting children with special needs from other states completed as quickly as possible. This contract is still in its infancy stages and therefore the effect of whether placements are completed more quickly is unknown. Records indicate that in 1999, there were a total of 512 children placed through ICPC. In 2000, another 278 cross-jurisdictional placements occurred. The Office of Adoptions will continue to monitor the effectiveness of this contract.

      
      

      Section IV - Narrative Assessment of Child and Family Outcomes

      1. Safety

      • Outcome S1: Children are, first and foremost, protected from abuse and neglect.

      • Outcome S2: Children are safely maintained in their homes whenever possible and appropriate.

      Based on examination of the safety data elements on the safety data profile in section III, and the State Child and Family Services Plan (State IV-B plan), please respond to the following questions.

      1. Trends in Safety Data. Have there been notable changes in the individual data elements in the safety profile in Section III over the past 3 years in the State? Identify and discuss factors that have affected the changes noted and the effects on the safety of children in the State.

      In 1998, the Georgia Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional to put a person's name on a perpetrator listing without that person having had full constitutional rights to appeal that decision. At that time Georgia expunged all identifying perpetrator information from its CPS data system. The case determination selection was also changed from three determinations to two determinations: from confirmed, unconfirmed and unfounded to substantiated and unsubstantiated. Investigations that had previously contained some evidence, although not enough to confirm abuse, now received the designation of unsubstantiated. Investigations that previously resulted in unfounded determinations are also part of the unsubstantiated category. This explains why 1998 and 1999 figures on the Child Safety Profile are proportionately different from those of 1997. The Substantiated and Indicated category for these two years consists only of those investigations that were substantiated. In 1997, the department investigated 48,770 reports of abuse. Of these 48,770 reports, 14,008 (28.7%) were confirmed, 14,004 (28.7%) were unconfirmed and 20,758 (42.6%) were unfounded. The figure for "Substantiated & Indicated" on the safety profile for 1997 is 28,012, a combination of the confirmed and unconfirmed investigations. Year Case Determination % 1997 28,012 Confirmed/Unconfirmed 57.4% 1997 20,758 Unfounded 42.6% 1997 14,008 Confirmed 28.7% 1997 34,762 Unconfirmed/Unfounded 71.3% 1998 14,936 Substantiated 31.8% 1998 32,071 Unsubstantiated 68.2% 1999 16,024 Substantiated 34.1% 1999 31,008 Unsubstantiated 65.9% The above chart shows that if 1997 figures for substantiated and indicated had not included the indicated (unconfirmed) determinations, the number and percentage for 1997 would be similar to 1998 and 1999. The chart shows a slightly increasing percentage of confirmed/substantiated determinations for this three-year period. This is attributed to Georgia's implementation statewide of a structured decision making model in 1998 and 1999. Use of that model anticipates an increase in the percentage of substantiated determinations. This happens because more reports that do not meet the criteria for CPS are routed to early intervention and prevention services instead of to CPS investigation. Georgia's gradual increase in substantiations during this period reflects the expectations of incorporating this model.

      2. Child Maltreatment (Safety Data Elements I & II). Examine the data on reports of child maltreatment disposed during the year by disposition of the reports. Identify and discuss issues affecting the rate of substantiated vs. unsubstantiated reports and factors that influence decision-making regarding the disposition of incoming reports.

      The differences for numbers of "Substantiated & Indicated" reports are not, in actuality, as great as what is presented on the Child Safety Profile. Georgia went from a three-tier (confirmed, unconfirmed, unfounded) to a two-tier (substantiated and unsubstantiated) reporting system, with the collection of 1998 data. This change was based on an order from the Georgia Supreme Court. For 1997 data to conform with collected data for 1998 and 1999, it is necessary to remove the 14,004 "indicated" (unconfirmed) investigated reports from the 28,012 "Substantiated & Indicated" reports. This leaves a total of 14,008 confirmed (substantiated) reports for 1997. The percentage of substantiated reports thus becomes 28.7%, a figure more comparable to the reported percentages of 31.8% for 1998 and 34.1% for 1999. Likewise, when looking at duplicated child counts, it is necessary to separate out numbers for "indicated" (unconfirmed) from the 1997 count to have child numbers conform for the three year period. The child count figures for confirmed/substantiated reports thus become: Confirmed/Substantiated Unconfirmed/Unsubstantiated 1997 23,012 (28.8%) 56,836 (71.2%) 1998 24,567 (33.1%) 49,613 (66.9%) 1999 26,888 (34.2%) 51,846 (65.8%) As expected, with the implementation of a structured decision making model, the total percentages of substantiated/confirmed investigations gradually increased. This is partly a result of reports that do not contain an allegation of maltreatment being dispositioned for early intervention services rather than being opened for an investigation. Recent policy and procedure also require consideration of early intervention for families at all stages of the CPS process. This requirement provides an alternative in the disposition of incoming reports. Disposition of incoming reports, to a degree, is influenced by what services and resources are available within a community. A county decision to refer a reported family directly to community services is obviously contingent on what is available. Also, each county is required to have a child abuse protocol team. The protocol is determined by the community representatives who make up these committees, and they have some influence over determining which cases a county department will accept for investigation.

      3. Cases Opened for Services (Safety Data Element III). Compare the cases opened for services following a report of maltreatment to the rates of substantiated reports received. Discuss the issues affecting opening cases following reports of maltreatment and reasons cases are or are not opened.

      If the same criteria is used for all three years of data, the "Child Cases Opened for Services" should be: 1997 = 9,246; 1998 = 8,918; 1999 = 9,006. These figures include opened confirmed/substantiated reports plus some unsubstantiated reports that are opened in response to a court order (usually court-ordered supervision). The breakdown, by year, of cases opened is: Substantiated Unsubstantiated Total Open 1997 7,933 (16.3%) 1,313 9,246 1998 8,191 (17.4%) 727 8,918 1999 8,521 (18.1%) 485 9,006 In the duplicated children column, the numbers shown on the Child Safety Profile for 1997 and 1998 represent reports/cases. For 1997, the profile shows 9,246 cases opened for services. This is a total of confirmed (7,933) and unconfirmed (1,313) reports opened. For 1998, the profile shows a total of 8,191 cases opened. This does not include 727 unsubstantiated (unsubstantiated) cases that were opened that year. For 1999, the profile lists 14,172 cases opened for services. This number is an estimated incident account. If a case count is used, this number becomes 8,521, a number more easily compared to figures from 1997 and 1998. The number of unsubstantiated reports opened for services has diminished over this three-year period. We explain this as one of the results of Georgia's implementation of a structured decision making model during the profiled years. Unsubstantiated, or unconfirmed, cases that were once opened for provision of early intervention type services within the CPS program are now referred to resources within the community for this assistance. Only those unsubstantiated cases that are court ordered for supervision are now opened for services.

      4. Children Entering Foster Care Based on Child Abuse and/or Neglect (CA/N) Report (Safety Data Element IV). Identify and discuss issues affecting the provision of home-based services to protect children from maltreatment and whether or not there is a relationship between this data element and other issues in the State, such as availability of services to protect children, repeat maltreatment, or changes in the foster care population.

      Georgia's data does not distinguish between children entering care who remained in care for placement services and those children who were been returned to their families within a few hours or prior to a 72-hour (show cause) hearing. Therefore, the numbers reported as children entering care are misleading. Georgia cannot at this time determine how many of these children remained in placement and how many were returned to their home prior to a 72-hour hearing. Since Georgia no longer separates indicated (unconfirmed) reports from unfounded cases (1977 was the last year this separation), percentages for 1998 (21.3%) and 1999 (18.6%) are based only on substantiations for duplicated children. The 1997 percentage of 9.2% is based on a combination of the substantiated and indicated children. It is unlikely that children with indicated designations would become part of the state's population of children in placement. Georgia is quickly moving to make more preventive services available throughout the state. These preventive and early intervention services are discussed in state CPS policy for consideration at all stages of contact with a family. Georgia does not yet have data that can measure the effectiveness of these efforts.

      5. Child Fatalities (Safety Data Element V). Identify and discuss child protection issues affecting child deaths due to maltreatment in the State and how the State is addressing the issues.

      The three years of data on the Child Safety Profile depict a yearly increase in the numbers for child fatalities. It is believed that these increases are partly attributed to better investigation and identification of maltreatment and not necessarily to a higher rate of child fatalities in Georgia. CPS investigators are more likely to recognize various forms of negligence as being responsible for a fatality and to record data attributing the fatality to substantiated neglect or abuse. The Commissioner's Task Force, formed in late 1999, was a result of several highly publicized child deaths in Georgia. The task force recognized that for the CPS program to be more responsive in the prevention of the serious injury and death of children in families with current or previous CPS history, it is necessary to maintain a stable and well-trained staff. The Governor's FY 2002 budget, which has been approved by the legislature, included the funding recommendations made by the task force. This will make it possible to begin making some major improvements in Georgia's CPS program. There is greater availability of training opportunities for CPS staff. This includes Georgia's Basic Investigative Training Education (B.I.T.E.), specialized training for fatality investigations and child fatality team investigations. There is a greater awareness of circumstances involving parents and caretakers that contribute to the death of a child. Resources for the support, development and provision of training have increased and include, in addition to state CPS staff, the state DFCS training unit, the Georgia Council on Child Abuse, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation and Georgia State University. These additional partners for training design and delivery mean more and better training for the state's CPS staff for all phases of child protective services. The recently established Special Investigations Unit, working within established state regions, is setting a standard for investigating child fatalities. Working closely with the counties, this becomes a work/training experience for county staff in how to work the case in collaboration with other team players and how to collect the available evidence. Georgia is in the process of establishing a statewide telemedicine network that will have physicians, expert in the recognition of physical and sexual abuse, available at selected regional hospitals throughout the state. Some of these centers are already operational and available to CPS staff. The department is collaborating with and funding a research project with the Emory School of Public Health to study those high risk factors in families that lead to serious child injury and fatality. Results of this research will be helpful in the development of future policy and training.

      6. Recurrence of Maltreatment (Safety Data Element VI). Discuss whether or not the State's recurrence of maltreatment conforms to the national standard for this indicator, the extent to which the State's rate of recurrence of child maltreatment is due to the same general circumstances or same perpetrator, and how the State is addressing repeat maltreatment.

      For the three profiled years, the percentages for the recurrence of maltreatment in Georgia are below the national standard of 5% for this indicator. It cannot be determined from available data the extent to which the state's rate of recurrence of child maltreatment results from the same general circumstances or whether it is by the same perpetrator. Availability of this type of data is anticipated when Georgia's SACWIS system, which is currently in the developmental stage, becomes operable. Georgia CPS policy, that was effective in November 2000, requires consideration of making a referral to available early intervention services at all stages of a CPS report/case. It is anticipated that this awareness and use of these resources will provide a family with additional supports that will help successfully avoid the future occurrence or reoccurrence of maltreatment.

      7. Incidence of Child Abuse and/or Neglect in Foster Care (Safety Data Element VI). Discuss whether or not the State's incidence of child maltreatment by the foster care provider conforms to the national standard for this indicator. Discuss the ways in which the State is addressing this issue and whether or not there is a need for additional measures to ensure the safety of children who are in foster care or pre-adoptive placements.

      Georgia's numbers for the Incidence of Child Abuse and/or Neglect in Foster Care is above the national standard of 0.4%. For Georgia in 1998, the percentage is 1.12% (142 incidences based on a population of 12,695). For 1999, the percentage is 1.08% (179 incidences based on a population of 16,531). Revised policy that will be effective this Spring states that any substantiated maltreatment in a foster/adopt or pre-adoptive home will result in closure of the home. A family's first violation of the discipline policy will result in either (1) a corrective action plan to address discipline issues that is developed between the agency and the family or, (2) in the closure of the home. The home is automatically closed if there is a second violation of the discipline policy. To better ensure safety of children in the department's custody, Georgia is requiring a CPS investigation for (1) any serious injury to a child in a department-approved home, (2) any unexplained or unanticipated death to a child in a department home, (3) reports that the parent/caretaker or other adult frequently in the home is an alleged maltreater in another CPS investigation or incident of domestic violence, (4) any sexual abuse to a child victim by a child maltreater or any sexual activity between children in the home to determine whether neglect or lack of supervision or sexual abuse/exploitation by the parent/caretaker is present and (5) historic reports. Georgia is also expanding the review of maltreatment in foster homes to include private agency foster homes, foster/adopt homes and adoptive homes approved for children in the legal custody of the department. Georgia has also established a Special Investigations Unit that has a consultant assigned to each area of the state. These consultants work within their assigned counties to assist with investigations of child fatality and serious injury cases and with reports of abuse in foster homes. They are also involved in the establishment of district investigative teams.

      8. Other Safety Issues. Discuss any other issues of concern, not covered above or in the data profiles, that affect the safety outcomes for children and families served by the agency.

      Georgia currently does not have family violence policy; however, this is being prepared and is expected to be in the field within the next few months. With more indepth review of fatality and serious injury cases, it has become obvious that many of these events occur in families with a history of family violence. It is the intent, with the addition of this policy, to identify families where children are at risk, even though there may not be a specific incident report, and to determine the need for departmental involvement. The state's Evaluation and Reporting Section is involved in a 100% review of service cases in the counties. Findings from counties reviewed thus far lend to concerns about the overall compliance with policies and the possible negative results in planning for children's safety that occur when requirements are not fully met. Findings show that response times were not met in 36% (1,320 of 3,632) of reports assigned for investigation and reviewed, collateral contacts were not made in 61% (877 of 1,430) of on-going cases reviewed, contact requirements were not met with parents/caretakers in 55% (798 of 1,446) of cases reviewed and contact requirements with children were not me tin 51% (877 of 1,704) of cases reviewed. It is recognized that staff shortage is a major factor in a county's ability to comply with all policy requirements. It is unknown to what extent the lack of full compliance with policy requirements currently effects (1) the numbers of families with successful resolutions to those issues that brought them to the department's attention and (2) the numbers of families that have new reports that bring them back into the system.

      2. Permanency

      • Outcome P1: Children have permanency and stability in their living situations.

      • Outcome P2: The continuity of family relationships and connections is preserved for children.

      Based on examination of the foster care data in the two foster care profiles in section III, and the State Child and Family Services Plan (State IV-B plan), please respond to the following questions.

      1. Trends in Permanency Data. Have there been notable changes in the individual data elements in the two permanency data profiles in section III over the past 3 years in the State? Identify and discuss any factors affecting the changes noted and the effects on permanency for children in foster care in the State.

      Due to suspected system errors in 1998 data, the following changes can be identified by comparing the 1997, 1999 and 2000 permanency data profiles: The most significant of all changes is the increase (5%) in the number of children for whom adoption is selected as the permanency plan. This outcome is not surprising given the changes in the law, beginning with the 1996 permanency reforms in state law, and subsequently, with the passage of the ASFA and its TPR mandate and compressed timeframes for achieving permanency. The plan of adoption is being identified at an earlier point in time for children entering care. Both state and federal statutes allow a "bypass" to adoption when certain circumstances related to parental circumstances or conditions exist. The law supports judges in terminating parental rights earlier, rather than exhausting reunification efforts where the prognosis is poor. Reunification as the permanency goal remained fairly constant, both for children entering care and those in care (point in time data). In 1999 and 1997, the percentages were nearly equal (85% and 86%, respectively). With reunification as the preferred permanency plan, this outcome was expected. However, as time went on, and a more realistic evaluation/prognosis for change was made, the goal of reunification declined to 63% and 64%, respectively. The permanency option of "guardianship" is rarely selected for Georgia's children (less than 1%). In the last three years, data indicates that it has decreased from .5% to .2% (1999). A possible reason for this is that Georgia's guardianship statute is not as permanent as the federal definition of "legal guardianship." It can be threatened whenever a parent who has agreed to the guardianship, petitions for custody or when the guardian has the guardianship dissolved. Additionally, there is no per diem or subsidy available to support the family unit. A desirable trend is a decrease in the selection of "long-term foster care" as a permanency plan. From 1997 to 1999, a downward trend from 11.5% to 6.8% was experienced. For children entering care for the first time, the percentage was extremely low (1.4%) and appropriately so. More recently, with the re-definition of permanency options and the Final Rule clarifications, there is better recognition that this goal is more of a "living arrangement," rather than a permanency goal. With added emphasis on documenting "compelling reasons" for selecting "another planned permanent living arrangement," a decline should continue as the trend. As the foster care population ages, emancipation as "another planned permanency living arrangement" has become a viable option for over 5%. With the increased opportunities afforded youth to better prepare for a successful transition to adulthood, it is likely that the current trend, reflecting a moderate increase of 2%, will continue.

      2. Foster Care Population Flow (Point-in-Time Data Element I & Cohort Data Element I). Identify and discuss any issues raised by the data regarding the composition of the State's foster care population, rates of admissions and discharges, and changes in this area. Discuss the State's ability to ensure that the children who enter foster care in the State are only those children whose needs for protection and care cannot be met in their own homes.

      The data shows a 23% increase from 1997 to 1999 in the number of admissions. It was in 1999 that the State Child Protective Services policy manual clearly addressed the mandated actions regarding positive drug test on mothers and/or newborns. The CPS mandated actions require local DFCS offices to file a court petition for custody and requires the mother to participate in a drug treatment program. Many of these newborns were admitted to foster care as evidenced by the increase in the number of children in foster care under 1 year of age. Georgia has 8% more children in foster care in this age group than what is reflected in the national data. Georgia's admissions rate continues to grow for this same population. Further analysis is needed to determine if early detection of substance abuse is the primary reason for the increase. Additionally, the 2000 census indicates that three of Georgia's counties, Paulding, Forsyth, and Henry, are among the fastest growing populated areas in the nation. These counties border the metro Atlanta area. In 1999 the data indicates a significant increase (42%) from 1997 in the number of children discharged out of foster care. The state attributes this increase to ASFA implementation. In September of 1998, Georgia initiated a "desk review" of all children in foster care as of July 1998 and began the process of applying/expediting the termination of parental rights provision in ASFA. The data in 2000 shows a slight decrease in the number of discharges during the year. Georgia has very specific policy regarding the removal of children from their homes. Section 2101.3 of the Social Services Manual, addresses "Good Practice Principles" regarding the safety and removal of children from their homes, as well as the rights of parents to responsibly rear their children. Social Services Manual Sections 2102.3 and 2102.4 delineate reasonable efforts (as defined in P.L. 96-272) to prevent a child's placement. A Reasonable Efforts CheckList (Safety Assessment) documents the efforts made to prevent removal of a child. A copy of this checklist is provided to the court to meet requirements of P.L. 96-272. Every deprivation case requires a judicial determination that reasonable efforts were made to prevent or eliminate the need to place the child in foster care and to make it possible for the child to return home. Family preservation programs can help many families before they reach the point of needing CPS intervention. Such programs offer distinct family centered services based on the needs of the child and family. Most of these services have been available since 1990 (see *). Social Services Manual Section 2107 defines the Family Preservation Programs offered by the state of Georgia: *Prevention of Unnecessary Placement (PUP) services are provided to reduce risk factors contributing to child maltreatment to ensure the protection and safety of children. PUP services include emergency housing/financial assistance, temporary childcare, counseling, emergency transportation, emergency medical/dental needs and psychiatric/psychological testing, funding for drug screens, and substance abuse assessments. A family must have an open Social Services case to receive PUP services. Early Intervention/Preventive Services (initiated in 2000) provide voluntary family support services and information about community services to prevent problematic family issues from escalating to the point of required CPS intervention. Early Intervention services are available for CPS referrals that are substantiated and closed with dispositions of low risk, referrals that are unsubstantiated and closed, referrals that are screened-out, and open cases reassessed as low risk and subsequently closed. A family with an open CPS case is not eligible to receive Early Intervention/Prevention services. *Parent Aide Services stabilize and help families in need of intervention by providing in-home and group parenting education and referrals to community based resources. Parent Aide services are paraprofessional as opposed to therapeutic intervention. Parent Aides work as a team member with casework staff, with the goal of ensuring the safety and protection of children by improving parenting competency. Responsibilities may include respite care, food and nutrition education, information on homemaking and budgeting topics, and assistance in accessing community resources. Families with an open Social Services case are eligible for this service. *Homestead Services provide short-term, intensive, crisis-oriented, in-home counseling in order to stabilize the family and insure a safe and healthy environment for the child and family. Homestead services are the most intensive of the Family Preservation Services. A family must have an open Social Services case to receive Homestead services. Homestead services can be used for children at imminent risk of placement and reunification when a child is being returned to his/her family. Social Services policy also outlines when the above Family Preservation Services may not be appropriate/effective and stresses that "A child's right to protection and safety outweighs a parent's right to the child and is always the primary consideration in CPS."

      3. Placement Types for Children in Foster Care (Point-in-Time Data Element II & Cohort Data Element II). How well is the State able to ensure that children are placed in the types of placements that are the most family-like and most appropriate for their individual needs, both at the time of initial entry into foster care and throughout their stay in foster care?

      Currently, the data shows 79% of Georgia's children in care are placed in a family foster care setting and nearly 19% of these children are placed with relatives. The implementation of the Georgia Relative Care subsidy in May 2001 is likely to increase the number of children placed permanently in relative care settings. In 1998 the Georgia legislature passed OCGA 15-11-58 (i) which empowered juvenile court judges to award permanent custody of children under the court's protection to a relative, until age 18, with a three-year review of the child and family by the juvenile court. While this was a major accomplishment, offering many children and their relative caregivers a sense of stability and permanence the legislation lacked financial supports for the children and their caregivers. Effective May 2001, Georgia, like many states, will use Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) re-direct funds to support these permanent placements. A non-reunification court order must precede the issuance of a permanent relative custody court order for subsidy eligibility. The relative care subsidy financially assists relatives to provide a permanent home for a child formerly in agency custody. The payments are made to help defray basic expenses that otherwise may jeopardize the child's opportunity to experience permanence. Georgia has identified a need for more emergency placements for children entering care and for placement disruptions. Additionally, due to extremely unfavorable media coverage on a few high profile cases, there has been a significant increase in the number of children entering foster care over the past 18 months. This has created an intense need for all types of placement resources. The media coverage has negatively impacted staff turnover, which impedes the continuity of placement supervision and services to families. The average length of case management experience is currently 3.5 months, which also compounds the turnover issue in Georgia. On a positive note, the media coverage also exposed the low case manager salaries and the high caseloads. In July 2001 the Georgia legislature has approved staff salary increases up to 15% depending upon job assignments and education and also 70 new case manager and 30 supervisor positions.

      4. Permanency Goals for Children in Foster Care (Point-in-Time Data Elements III & VIII and Cohort Data Elements III & V.) Discuss the extent to which children in care are moving safely into permanent living arrangements on a timely basis and issues affecting the safe, timely achievement of permanency for children in the State.

      The percentage of children discharged to reunification/relative placement remained at 86% for FFY 1997 through 1999. For this same time period, the median months to discharge (for children having reunification/relative placement as their permanency goal) increased from 3.94 to 5.32 (35%). The increased number of children entering foster care, in conjunction with the extreme case manager turn over rate, adversely affected the median months to (reunification) discharge. However, the total number of children discharged increased by approximately 56% from 1997 to 1999 and the number of children discharged to adoption nearly doubled from 566 in 1997 to 1,042 in 1999. Additionally, the median months to discharge (for children having adoption as their permanency goal) decreased from 41.49 months to 37.13 months. The decrease in the months to discharge to adoption and the increase in the total number of discharges are due in large part to Georgia's commitment to implementing ASFA and improving permanency outcomes for children. Georgia's policies and procedures were revised; child welfare staff, judges, special assistants to the Attorney General (SAAG), foster and adoptive providers received information, intensive training and technical assistance regarding ASFA requirements and the policy revisions. In 1997, prior to ASFA, Georgia passed Senate Bill 611, entitled "Deprived Child Removed from the Home-Reunification Services", which put in place legislation and state policy allowing the child welfare system the option to file for non-reunification to expedite permanency. Since 1997, DHR annually sponsors the Georgia Foster Parent and Staff Development Institutes in various locations around the state. The Institutes are designed to meet the training needs of Georgia's foster parents by providing support for their continuing development at the local level. The purpose of the Institute is to: Assist foster parents in managing the difficult behaviors of children placed in their homes; Ensure that Georgia's children in foster care are entrusted to foster parents who have received the highest quality training available; Provide strategies to support foster parents in managing the behaviors of varying age groups; Develop partnerships at the local level to support foster parents/agency networks in helping families to cope with the management of difficult behaviors. Provide foster parents with the skills and training required for meeting the needs of medically fragile children placed in their care. The expected Institute outcomes are to promote what is working, to make improvements/changes in specific areas as needed, and to discontinue non-productive practices.

      5. Achievement of Reunification (Point-in-Time Data Element IX). Discuss whether the State's data regarding achievement of reunification within 12 months from the time of the latest removal from home conform with the national standards for this indicator. Identify and discuss issues affecting conformity and how the State is addressing the issues.

      The state's data did not conform to the national standard. In February 1999 Georgia instituted the First Placement/Best Placement (FP/BP) initiative to provide comprehensive assessment strategy for all children entering foster care as well as their families. The FP/BP assessment focuses on early and continuous assessment of the strengths and needs of children and families, case plan development with the family, and the least intrusive interventions to reduce lengths of stay and placement disruptions. This assessment also includes multidisciplinary team staffing and family conferencing. The FP/BP approach provides greater collaboration with child welfare stakeholders, families, and providers and it also makes available information from which sound case management decisions can be made. The planned implementation of a SACWIS system will greatly assist case management decisions regarding reunification within 12 months of the date of the earliest removal, and other judicial reviews, terminations and discharges. The impact of substance abuse and the lack of readily accessible and available statewide treatment programs tremendously affect reunification efforts within the 12-month time frame. About 32% of children are in care due to substance abuse related issues. The reporting of caretaker substance abuse into the state's CPS data system is requested but not required. We believe this information is seriously under reported by case managers. Additionally, Georgia law requires that "If a child is found to be a deprived child and the deprivation is found to have been the result of alcohol or other drug abuse…and the court orders transfer of temporary legal custody of the child…the court is authorized to further order that legal custody of the child may not be transferred back to the person having custody of the child when the deprivation occurred unless such person undergoes substance abuse treatment and random substance abuse screenings and those screenings remain negative for a period of no less than six consecutive months". This law and state policy will continue to greatly impact Georgia's ability to conform to the national standard.

      6. Achievement of Adoption (Point-in-Time Data Element X). Discuss whether the State's data on children exiting foster care to a finalized adoption within less than 24 months from the latest removal from home conform to the national standard for this indicator. Identify and discuss issues affecting the number of children placed for adoption in the State and how the State is addressing the issues.

      Georgia has made major strides in adoption planning and placement following a change in our state law in 1996. Senate Bill 611 (referred to as Georgia's Permanency Bill) increased our ability to file for termination of parental rights much sooner in accordance with ASFA guidelines. As a result of this legislation and other initiatives, we are freeing and placing more children for adoption. Although we have made strides in increasing our numbers, the length of time children remain in foster care until adoption finalization continues to be an area of concern and challenge. The Office of Adoptions was created in January 1997 with a mission to develop and implement an efficient, outcome based, quality, special needs adoption program that would eliminate and facilitate the elimination of barriers to adoption in the state system. The Office of Adoptions goals and objectives centered around reducing the length of stay in foster care and moving children into adoption in a timely manner. The goals to support this objective are defined as 1) Privatization of service provision areas where appropriate and cost effective. 2) Private sector involvement that actively seeks assistance from sources outside state government to support innovative approaches that will increase placements and supports for adoptive families. 3) Adoption policy revisions in order to streamline the process and speed up placements. 4) Development of innovative ways to recruit adoptive families. 5) Development of post-adoption services through a network of community based resources designed to support families after adoption. Meeting these stated objectives has resulted in a 32 percent increase of finalized adoptions from 1997 to 1999. Georgia was one of 35 states to receive the first award of incentive payments for increasing the number of finalized adoptions during federal fiscal year 1998. Georgia's award was the 11th highest in the nation. Our challenge continues to be a reduction in the time a child remains in foster care until finalization. We have made some strides in that effort and our objectives and services are geared to meeting and exceeding the national standard. FFY # kids finalized # exited< 24 mo. % exited< 24 mo. ----- ------------------- -------------------- ---------------------- 97 715 159 22 98 775 160 21 99 979 223 23 We have made tremendous strides in early identification of permanency placements for children. In FFY 97, seventy-one (71%) percent of the children finalized were adopted by their foster parents. This percentage rose to 84 percent in FFY 99. We have been able to contract with private contractors to complete the child's life history and foster home conversions to adoptive homes in order to facilitate timely adoptive placements. Since its inception the Office of Adoptions has aggressively pursued contractual partnerships with licensed private agencies and other for profit and non-profit organizations to provide services to children and families. We contract with licensed private adoption agencies to provide recruitment, assessments, placement, supervision, post placement services and post adoption services to children in DHR custody. Contracting with these agencies increased from four contracts with four different agencies in 1995 to 23 contracts with 10 different agencies in 1999. The outcome of this effort to engage the private sector has resulted in an increase in the number of available adoptive resources, a decrease in the amount of time that children wait for placements, the placement of a greater number of children in permanent homes, and greater support for adoptive families. We continue to be concerned about the effect of staff turnover in completing the detailed work of adoption. Our efforts will continue to be geared to providing specialized training and support for both social workers and the adoptive families. This will enable us to continue to achieve early permanency for more of our children and to further support new families created through adoption.

      7. Termination of Parental Rights (TPR) (Point-in-Time Data Element VI). Discuss the extent to which the State complies with the requirement at section 475(5)(E) of the act regarding termination of parental rights for children who have been in foster care 15 of the most recent 22 months, for abandoned infants, and for children whose parents have been convicted of the listed felonies. Identify and discuss the issues that affect timely termination of parental rights, where appropriate, including the use of the exceptions to the TPR provisions.

      In Georgia the number of TPR's has steadily increased from 2,167 to 3,125 in 2000. In 1997, 50.8% of the children were in care 17 of the most recent 22 months and in 1999, 46.3% of the children were in this same category. The number of adoptions nearly doubled from 566 in1997 to 1,042 in 1999. With such an increase, Georgia is paying close attention to the demographics of the children, the resources that will be needed to be responsive to their needs, and the support that families will need to provide permanency for these children. Due to better assessments, family conferencing, and the implementation of relative care subsidies, Georgia expects that more children will be placed with relatives more quickly. Additionally, increased funding via the Chaffee Independent Act in 1999 will result in more children aging out of the foster care population.

      8. Stability of Foster Care Placements (Point-in-Time Data Elements IV & XI and Cohort Data Element IV). Using data element XI on the point-in-time permanency profile, discuss whether the percentage of children in the State who have been in foster care less than 12 months and have had more than two placement settings conforms to the national standard for this indicator. Using all three data elements noted above, identify and discuss the reasons for the movement of children in foster care in the State. If there are differences in placement stability for children newly entering the system (cohort data) compared with the total population of children in care (permanency data), identify and discuss those issues.

      Georgia conforms to the national standard for this indicator. The 1999 implementation of the First Placement/Best Placement assessments has resulted in the availability of more thorough information for DHR, staff, courts and other stakeholders to make appropriate placement and permanency decisions for children and families. Better than 90% of the children in care had no more than two placements while in foster care in the cohort group and the same is true for the total population of children in foster care. The availability of additional therapeutic resources, better preparation training and support of caretakers has had an impact. Additionally, foster parents adopt over 80% of the children in care, which provides more stability and fewer placements for the children. Though slight, the Georgia legislature has approved steady increases in the foster care per diem over the past three years from $10.70 in 1997 to $12.00 in 2000. Georgia is also expecting an increase to the foster care per diem in 2001. Additional placement resources continue to be needed especially for large sibling groups, medically fragile children and teens entering or lingering in care. Re-entry rates do not reflect the fact that a re-entrant often brings siblings, who were not a part of the original entry, which compounds placement issues. In order to maintain the stability of placements and replenish the number of foster parents lost to adoption, Georgia is developing a statewide recruitment campaign for foster and adoptive parents. This will be a five year comprehensive plan to include public information and staff training at all levels from County DFACS receptionist, agency administrators and managers, foster/adoptive parents to civic and community groups, as well as periodic focus groups with potential/current foster/adoptive parents. Georgia has worked extremely hard at improving the stability of children in foster care and will continue to do so. The success of Georgia's past recruitment efforts is reflected in the numbers of recruited foster parents who are committed to and meet agency requirements to become adoptive parents. Losing good foster homes is desirable when achievement of permanency for a child is the ultimate outcome.

      9. Foster Care Re-Entries (Point-in-Time Data Elements V & XII). Using data element XII, discuss whether the percentage of children who entered foster care during the period under review who had a prior entry into foster care within 12 months of a prior foster care episode conforms to the national standard for this indicator. Using both data elements, discuss the extent of foster care re-entries for all children in the State's placement and care responsibility, the issues affecting re-entries, and how the State is addressing the issues.

      Georgia conforms to the national standard for this indicator. The State has provided statewide family centered reunification services to families since 1990. These services include in-home support services, parent aide services, counseling, substance abuse treatment services, assistance with concrete family needs such as help with rent, household goods, etc., all of which help to promote safe reunification. These services also helped Georgia reduce the number of children who re-enter foster care from 5.12% in 1997 to 4.43% in 1999. The state is paying close attention to this indicator because in 2000 the number of re-entries in foster care increased to 7%. This is reflected in the increase in the total number of children who are entering care; the lack of availability and accessibility of intensive substance abuse treatment; and a statewide staff turnover rate of 44% (which affects continuity of services). These factors when looked at together, will impact the number of children who re-enter foster care. One of the practice strategies Georgia is using in response to the re-entry increase is First Placement/Best Placement. This strategy focuses on providing and directing services to children and families based on a comprehensive assessment of individual needs. A multidisciplinary team staffing and family centered conferencing is held with the family to develop a case plan for the child and family. Currently, Georgia is expanding First Placement/Best Placement services statewide to ensure that a full continuum of services is available from entry into care through adoption and/or transition to independent living.

      10. Length of Stay in Foster Care (Point-in-Time Data Element VII & Cohort Data Element VI). Using data element VI in the cohort data profile, discuss how length of stay in foster care for first-time foster care entries in the State compares with the national standard for this indicator (although this indicator is not used to determine substantial conformity). Examining the data on length of stay in both profiles, identify and discuss factors affecting length of stay in foster care and how the State is addressing the issues. If there are differences in the length of stay between children newly entering foster care in the State (cohort data) and the total population of children in care (permanency data), identify and discuss the reasons.

      In Georgia the median length of stay for children in foster care in the 1999 point-in-time profile was 18.29 months and for the cohort group it was 14.39. In May of 1996, the Georgia Department of Audit and Accounts conducted a program evaluation that focused on the length of time children stay in foster care. "It did not attempt to evaluate other aspects of foster care such as prevention, safety in foster care or whether foster care placements were appropriate. The evaluation sought to identify the impact that management (at both the local and state level) has on the average length of stay in foster care and to identify problems that impacts the length of stay in foster care. The evaluation found the following: Goals and measurable objectives regarding length of stay in foster care are needed. The state also needs to provide more program monitoring to help local foster care workers minimize children's stays in foster care while continuing to ensure their safety. While Georgia's "reported" average length of stay in foster care compares favorably with figures "reported" by other states (national benchmarks do not exists), the evaluation team feels that room for improvement still exists. The amount of improvement cannot be predicted; however, a directed effort to identify and address problems that hinder the permanent placement of children in foster care should ultimately result in a reduced average length of stay. The Internal Data System (IDS) used to track children in foster care did not provide reliable information on the length of stay in foster care, and length of stay data in the IDS does not match information in case files. Computerized data is needed to adequately monitor length of stay in foster care, the time children spend in smaller component parts of the overall foster care process, the status of children available for adoption, and children whose permanent placement has been identified as long-term foster care. More study is needed to determine if local foster care workers' "caseloads" have an impact on the average length of stay of children in foster care. Problems that may impact children's length of stay in foster care (such as lack of parental responsibility, problems with severing parental rights) have not been thoroughly analyzed or quantified by program personnel." A follow-up to the length of time in foster care evaluation was conducted in 1998 and identified that the Department of Human Resources had taken action to address, or was in the process of addressing, each of the findings in the evaluation: The Department has developed goals and performance measures regarding length of stay in foster care. The Department's Results Based Budget for FY 1999 includes goals and measures for making permanent placement decisions within 12 months and for expediting the adoptive placement of children in the permanent custody of the Department. ASFA and Senate Bill 611 helped to frame these measures. In addition, Georgia's First Placement/Best Placement Initiative is a structured plan and one of its main objectives is to shorten the length of stay in foster care. The Department is in the process of developing the data needed to adequately monitor length of stay in foster care. To address immediate problems with the accuracy and timeliness of the limited data available through the IDS, the Department's Quality Assurance Section has started reviews to ensure the IDS data is accurate and timely. Problems identified in the evaluation that may impact children's length of stay in foster care have been, or in the process of being analyzed. Problems with the lack of parental responsibility and problems with severing parental rights have been studied. Changes in State and Federal laws have been made to facilitate severing parental rights.

      11. Other Permanency Issues. Discuss any other issues of concern, not covered above or in the data, that affect the permanency outcomes for children and families served by the agency.

      Older children ages 16 to 21 who continue to be in foster care as adolescents become eligible for the State Independent Living Program (ILP). ILP is not an alternative to adoption and can occur concurrent with continued efforts to locate and achieve placement in adoptive families. IL services are designed and provided by the State to help prepare adolescents for employment, post-secondary education, and successful management of adult responsibilities. If it is determined that reunification with the biological family is not in the best interest of an older youth, or if the youth chooses not to be adopted, every effort is made to assure a successful transition to self-sufficient adulthood. The passage of the Foster Care Independence Act of 1999 (PL 106-169), increased available funding and the state's ability to provide housing, counseling, education, employment and other appropriate support services to existing and former foster care youth between the ages of 18 and 21. In 2000, the state partnered with the Casey Family Program to initiate a pilot Transitional Living Program (TLP) for older youth exiting foster care in the metropolitan Atlanta area. The TLP is inclusive of a comprehensive youth and family assessment, family conference, a written transitional living plan, life skills training, supervised apartment living and other identified support services. These efforts will eventually be implemented statewide and are designed to decrease the occurrence of homelessness, non-marital childbearing, poverty, delinquency and acts of physical assault by and/or to our youth. To involve youth in the development of IL activities and services, in 2000 the state sponsored the development of a Youth Leadership Council (YLC). The YLC serves in an advisory capacity to the IL State Coordinator who develops policy and oversees the administration of IL services throughout the state. Youth Leadership Council (YLC) is a group of current and former foster youth, ages 15-22 who are advocating for youth of all ages in foster care. The mission is: Developing an effective voice for foster youth. The YLC was formed in June of 2000. The Council grew out of the Celebration of Excellence, an annual statewide event honoring youth in the foster care system who are graduating from high school or college. Organizers of the Celebration were inspired by the youth honorees and their successes. They envisioned a group of foster youth that would work to develop leadership skills, which could then be used to advocate for children of all ages in the foster care system. The goals are: To increase community awareness and change public perceptions and actions regarding the foster care system To enhance the leadership skills of YLC members To increase knowledge of and participation in the legislative process by youth affected by the foster care system To help enact change in the foster care system To provide networking and support opportunities to youth on the council Issues facing foster care youth include: Movement from placement to placement Changes in schools Lack of consistent emotional support A deficient understanding of the system responsible for their well being Lack of permanency Lack of financial support Inadequate resources to go on to college or other higher education Absence of emotional support to ease transition into adulthood Absence of the models to provide guidance on day to day problems Scarcity of stable and affordable housing Projects the YLC is working on include: Advocating for tuition waivers for those foster youth going on to higher education Day at the Capitol Handbook for youth in foster care Speaking at state and national level conferences to increase awareness of the foster care system To assist agency staff and foster parents in working more effectively in achieving permanency for children, the Foster Care Unit has published a quarterly newsletter Partnerships in Fostering since 1998. The Unit designed this newsletter as a training tool which provides timely articles on practice issues, policy and legislation. The newsletter is distributed to all active foster parents and child placement staff in 159 county departments. The foster care newsletter Partnerships in Fostering was developed in response to requests from foster parents and staff who were concerned about the agency and families working more closely together to reduce the incidence of maltreatment in foster homes. Foster parents and agency staff felt somewhat isolated from each other in receiving training and information. Foster parents especially felt the need for receiving more support in caring for children with multiple needs and complex behaviors. Foster parents serving as newsletter design team members with county and state staff felt that an information-based newsletter would help parents feel involved and supported in working toward permanency. Each newsletter issue focuses on a theme related to the health, safety and emotional needs of children while transitioning them to permanency. Topics have included behavior management, managing conflict while working with team members (birth families and caseworkers), medically fragile children, partnering with the school system, permanency options, and substance abuse. Topics are chosen to be timely in meeting the needs and issues expressed by foster parents and staff and complement other training provided foster parents through on-going institutes and other specialized training programs. There are three other factors that have not been discussed, but definitely impact on the agency's ability to move a child into adoption or another permanent placement. Staff turnover is a major problem as caseloads are often uncovered or covered by new workers who are just learning policy. The second barrier is that Juvenile Court Judges do not always comply with ASFA. They have been educated on this issue, but do not always carry out the regulations as outlined in ASFA. The last barrier is a most recent development concerning Adoption Assistance. Children are not able to be placed with relatives and receive Adoption Assistance benefits unless they have been in the custody of DHR. This impedes the placement process. Before the January 23, 2001 changes, as long as the child were AFDC eligible at the time the adoption petition was filed, living in the home of a specified relative and met the definition of special needs, then the child could receive benefits. This way the agency could place children without having to complete a life history on the child and a home evaluation on the relative. Current policy no longer allows the one point in time eligibility unless the child is receiving SSI or had previously received Adoption Assistance.

      3. Child and Family Well-Being

      • Outcome WB1: Families have enhanced capacity to provide for their children's needs.

      • Outcome WB2: Children receive appropriate services to meet their educational needs.

      • Outcome WB3: Children receive adequate services to meet their physical and mental health needs.

      Based on any data the agency has available, please respond to the following questions.

      1. Frequency of Contact Between Caseworkers and Children and their Families. Examine any data the State has available about the frequency of contacts between caseworkers and the children and families in their caseloads. Identify and discuss issues that affect the frequency of contacts and how the frequency of contacts affects the outcomes for children and families served by the State.

      No statewide data is available which reports the frequency of visitation or contact between caseworkers and the children and families in their caseloads. At the local level, however, the Placement Supervisory Review Guide and the Evaluation and Reporting Guide provide the internal mechanisms to monitor the frequency of case manager - child contacts in accordance with required standards. (See examples of contact standards below.) Contacts between the case manager and the parent are documented in the case plan, including the type, frequency and nature of the contacts. This information is reviewed by the court or the court-appointed Citizen Panel at the time of the six-month review. Section 1011, Service Needs of the Child, Foster Care Services Manual, provides the contact standards for each placement case type. Variables include whether the contact is face-to-face, where the contact occurs, who is present and whether there are acceptable alternatives for meeting the contact standard. Our contact standards were revised in 2000 to enhance communication with the family and to strengthen the Division's monitoring of the child's safety in out-of-home care. Placement Case Type Contact Standards: Foster Family Care 1 face-to-face with child per month. At least every other month, required contact made in the foster home. Foster Home (Private) 3 face-to-face with child per year; quarterly written or phone contact if no face-to-face that quarter. Group Care 2 face-to-face with child per year; quarterly written or phone contact if no face-to-face that quarter. Parent's Home 1 face-to-face with child and family each month. Relative Home 1 face-to-face with the child per month until placement is stable; then, 1 face-to-face every 2 months with a collateral contact in "off" month. Aftercare 1 face-to face with child and family each month. Contact requirements for child protective services begin immediately upon completion of the risk assessment scale. This scale is completed for all investigated reports that are substantiated. The three possible risk ratings are Low, Moderate and High. Minimum monthly contact standards, which are determined by risk level, are: High Risk requires three fact-to-face contacts (one face-to-face with the child; three face-to-face with parents) and three collateral contacts. Moderate Risk requires two face-to-face contacts (one face-to-face with the child; two face-to-face with parents) and two collateral contacts. Low Risk requires one face-to-face contact (one face-to-face with the child; one face-to-face with parents) and one collateral contact. The case manager is responsible for all required face-to-face contacts with children. On a case rated high risk, a face-to-face contact by a Homestead provider may be substituted for one required face-to-face monthly contact with the parent. Use of good CPS practice judgement helps determine when more contacts are needed for specific cases. Some counties have expressed difficulty meeting required contact standards. This is mainly attributed to the high staff turnover rate and the time involved to replace positions and to train new staff. The state has given some time-limited waivers to counties experiencing these staffing problems, allowing for Homestead providers to cover some additional required contacts.

      2. Educational Status of Children. Examine any data the State has available regarding the educational status of children in its care and placement responsibility. How does the State ensure that the educational needs of children are identified in assessments and case planning and that those needs are addressed through services?

      For child protective services cases, one category on the Strength/Needs Assessment for substantiated reports is Child Characteristics. This addresses any physical, emotional or intellectual problem and the degree of severity for each child. As part of the on-going case planning with the family, the case manager and family must address a child's educational needs in the case plan whenever this is identified as a need in the family. The Standards for Comprehensive Child and Family Assessments - FORM #65 (Rev. 6/1/00) developed by the Division of Family and Children Services supports the Division's Reform Strategy - First Placement Best Placement. As part of the Comprehensive Child and Family Assessment, there is an Educational Evaluation Assessment that must be completed. If counties choose to purchase just the Educational Evaluation, they may do so on the Prorated Assessment Invoice for a maximum amount of $100.00 per child. The Education Evaluation portion of the comprehensive assessment includes a copy of any school records (grades, discipline reports, attendance records and achievements) within the last school year, a brief summary statement on the child's current functioning in the current grade level and any other significant issues and the completion of a three (3) page Educational form. This form was designed by a consultant from the Department of Education who participates on our State Agency MATCH Committee. It is valid for a one-year period, after which the Case manager is responsible for maintaining the child's school records and updating any school information in the file. (Social Services Manual Chapter 1011.7) The three (3) page form covers the child's strengths, needs, and request results of a child's Individualized Educational Plan (IEP). Multidisciplinary Team (MDT) Staffings are a requirement of the FORM #65. Private providers are allowed a maximum of 60 days from date of removal to complete the comprehensive assessment process. The MDT is comprised of the private provider, DFCS staff persons (case manager, supervisor, director, etc.) and any additional representatives of the child and/or family involved in the life of the child/family. The charge of the MDT is to review the assessment components and provide recommendations on placement appropriateness and service provision. Recommendations are then incorporated into the Case Plan. These recommendations are individualized and tailored to meet the needs of the child, birth family and caregivers. The Case Plan Reporting System (CPRS) - {Online Case Plan) is an Internet based data entry system that was developed as a collaborative effort between the Supreme Courts of Georgia, Georgia Tech Research Institute and the Division of Human Resources - Division of Family and Children Services. The CPRS is currently in process of being implemented by DHR. Training began February 19 and continues to March 31, 2001. The CPRS is being piloted in 19 counties statewide with a users base of over 400 case managers. The pilot project for the CPRS began in late September 1999. The CPRS should be used to complete Case Plans for every child entering care by the casemanager. The Case manager will enter information regarding the Case Plan Goals and Steps and other valuable information and Permanency Plan for the child. An Initial Case Plan is completed within 30 days from Removal and transmitted via Internet to the Juvenile Court Judge assigned to the case. The Judge will offer changes, recommendations and/or approve the Case Plan. Once approved the Case Plan is locked into a data base housed at the Archive Building. Periodic reviews are completed on a child from a mirror image or "draft" case plan available to the case manager. Each case manager has been assigned a user ID and password. They may access the Case Plan from any computer in the world via Internet access. There is an Education section on the CPRS. This section should be completed on every child who is 4 years and older. This section covers the name of the school system, address, phone number, type of classroom placement, explores, it the child is attending school on a regular basis and performing at grade level and whether or not the child has any special educational needs. It also asks if the child has changed schools because of the removal and whether or not the school records are found in the child's file.

      3. Health Care for Children. Examine any data the State has available regarding the provision of health care, including Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment (EPSDT), to children in its care and placement responsibility. How does the State ensure that the physical health and medical needs of children are identified in assessments and case planning activities and that those needs are addressed through services?

      For child protective services cases, one category on the Strength/Needs Assessment for substantiated reports is Child Characteristics. This addresses any physical, emotional or intellectual problem and the degree of severity for each child. As part of the on-going case planning with the family, the case manager and family must address a child's health care needs in the case plan whenever this is identified as a need in the family. The Standards for Comprehensive Child and Family Assessments - FORM #65 (Rev. 6/1/00) developed by the Division of Family and Children Services supports the Division's Reform Strategy - First Placement Best Placement. As part of the Comprehensive Child and Family Assessment, there is a Medical Evaluation Assessment that must be completed. If counties choose to purchase just the Medical Evaluation Assessment, they may do so on the Prorated Assessment Invoice for a maximum amount of $150.00 per child. The Medical Evaluation Assessment portion of the comprehensive assessment includes a copy of any recent medical records within the last calendar year. Providers are required to fully complete DHR's Form #419 (Background Information for State Agency Child) - this is a 7 page synopsis on the child's family medical background from both the paternal and maternal side of the family. Lastly, the completion of a two (2) page Medical Evaluation form covers areas of the child's health history that are not explored by Form #419. It covers the child's history of illness, the family's health history and the child's personal health history (to include allergies, hospitalizations, significant injuries, sexual activity history, substance use history immunizations, etc.) It also includes a section to be completed by a Medical Doctor, Licensed Nurse which covers the child's physical exam (exploring areas such as weight, height, blood pressure, skin, HEENT, Heart, Lungs, Genitalia, Musculoskeletal, Neurologic, Laboratory Data, etc.) The Physicians impressions, treatment plan and recommendations and any referrals are also apart of this form. Case managers are required by policy (Social Services Manual Chapter 1011.2) to arrange appropriate and timely medical care for a child in care and for obtaining health-related documents for the case record. The case manager provides: Follow up on any recommendations; Arranges for routine, preventative medical care for a Medicaid eligible child through the early and periodic screenings of the health check program (formerly the EPSDT program) and/or with the child's private provider if not Medicaid eligible; Schedules well checks periodically (depending on the child's age); Communicates and updates the child's foster parent or other provider about the child's health status and health care needs; Immediately informs the parent of any injuries, accidents or major illnesses of the child while in care. CPRS data entry should be completed on a child with the initial case plan and then updated on the periodic case plans for the child and family. There are two sections on the CPRS - Health care Provider and health Care Status that should be completed on every child in care. The Health Care Provider section gives the provider's (Physician, Clinic, Hospital, etc.) name, address and phone number. The Health Care Status section covers immunization information, medications, last dates of medical, dental and psychological evaluations, and whether or not the documents can be found in the record.

      4. Mental Health Care for Children. Examine any data the State has available regarding the mental health needs and status of children in its care and custody. How does the State ensure that the mental health needs of children are identified in assessments and case planning activities and that those needs are addressed through services?

      For child protective services cases, one category on the Strengths/Needs Assessment for substantiated reports is Child Characteristics. This addresses any physical, emotional or intellectual problem and the degree of severity for each child. As part of the on-going case planning with the family, the case manager and family must address a child's mental health care needs in the case plan whenever this is identified as a need in the family. As part of the Comprehensive Child and Family Assessment, there is a Psychological Evaluation that must be completed on all children 4 and over. If counties choose to purchase just the Psychological Evaluation, they may do so on the Prorated Assessment Invoice for a maximum amount of $450.00 per child. Only Licensed Psychologists / Psychiatrists are eligible to complete psychological evaluations. Psychometricians may be used to administer and score tests. However the psychologist/psychiatrist is responsible for diagnoses, summaries and treatment recommendations. These evaluations must include Adaptive Behavioral Scales, Academic Screening and Assessment and Personality Measures Standardized Behavioral check list, and the DSM IV - Multi-Axial Diagnosis. If a child does not have a comprehensive child/youth and family assessment completed as they enter care, case managers are required to have a psychological or psychiatric evaluation completed. The psychological evaluation with a written report must be completed within 180 calendar days of the date of removal if the child is 6 years or older and has not had an evaluation within the past six months. (Social Services Manual Chapter 1011.5). Case managers may utilize the services of Mental Health/ Mental Retardation and Substance Abuse (MH/MR/SA) for diagnostic and treatment services before considering private Medicaid providers and follow-up and monitoring of any mental health referral and child's progress in responding to the services provided. Infants and Toddlers are too young to have a psychological evaluation completed on them, so as part of the Comprehensive Child and Family Assessment, there is a Developmental Screening and/or Assessment Evaluation that must be completed on all infants and toddlers ages 0 - 3 years. If counties choose to purchase just the Developmental Screening and/or Assessment Evaluation, they may do so on the Prorated Assessment Invoice for a maximum amount of $450.00 per child. If an infant/toddler does not have a comprehensive child/youth and family assessment completed as they enter care, case managers are responsible for obtaining developmental information from various sources and recording the information in the child's record. (Social Services Manual Chapter 1011.6) Older children in care may also benefit from developmental information if they have low IQ's, delays or other disabilities causing concern in these areas. The case manager is also responsible for ensuring that appropriate referrals to a diagnostic/treatment providers for further evaluation of any developmental delays, disabilities, etc. are followed up on when indicated. Case managers should also assist the child in the development of a Life Book as a concrete and visual record of the child's family history and life events. Case managers are required by policy (Social Services Manual Chapter 1011.12) to arrange appropriate and timely medical care for a child in care and for obtaining health-related documents for the case record. Case managers may utilize the services of MH/MR/SA for diagnostic and treatment services before considering private medicaid providers. They provide: Follow-up and monitoring of any mental health referrals; and Updates on the child's progress in responding to the services provided.

      5. Other Well-Being Issues. Discuss any other issues of concern, not covered above or in the data, that impact on the well-being outcomes for children and families served by the agency.

      First Placement/Best Placement as a strategy has moved DFCS to a family centered approach and in CPS, to child focused and family centered practice. Statewide implementation of the first phase (the assessment process) began in February 1999. DFCS conducted statewide training in nine different sites around the state. The strategy holds fast to its five goals and nine principles, which are as follows: Goals To reduce the number of children coming into care To reduce the number of movements children experience in foster care To decrease the length of time children remain in care To reduce the subsequent placements of children in care To expedite a permanency solution and plans for children Principles (Key Words) Assessment Driven Safety Integrated Systems Systems Approach Partnerships with Foster Families Partnerships with Public/Private Agencies Results Driven Respect of Culture Participation Family Conferencing has impacted the well-being outcomes for children in families served by the agency. It works at any point and time in the life of a case. The use of Family Conferencing in Moderate/High Risk CPS cases has served to benefit families in determining safety and protection issues and exploring other options for placement prior to the child's entrance into the foster care system. The use of Family Conferencing in foster care cases has been extremely helpful, not only to the children and their families, but also to other service providers involved with the families. It shifts responsibility to its rightful place - the family. Parents are even confronted by other family and community members regarding their behaviors, plan of action and attitudes. It assists all who are involved, including DFCS, to develop solutions to expedite permanency plans for children. Case Plan development, support and implementation is a by-product of any Family Conference. Parents are empowered to develop their own solutions and address their strengths and needs in a "neutral" environment with concerned and interested parties and natural support systems which encourage them to make the best and most sound decisions for their children in care. Relative Care Subsidy The fact that Georgia did not have a law allowing juvenile court judges to award permanent custody to fit and willing relatives until 1998, impacted the number of children remaining in the Department's custody for extended periods. One approach that Georgia is currently developing to offer children an opportunity to achieve permanency and exit the system sooner is the Relative Care Subsidy (RCS) program. RCS enables the Department to provide financial support for children transitioning from foster care into the permanent legal custody of an approved relative caregiver. RCS is authorized through the month of the child's 18th birthday, unless it is determined that the child has become ineligible for continued RCS payments. The issuance of a non-reunification court order on the child's behalf must precede the permanent custody transfer for receipt of subsidy. Relatives caring for children, eligible for subsidy, receive a monthly payment of $10.00 per day to help defray the cost of the child's day-to-day expenses. When RCS is implemented by Spring 2001, the Department expects to close approximately 600 cases of children (1/3 of those currently in relative home placements, according to Jan. '01 IDS report). By providing support services and subsidy payments to relative caregivers, the Department is providing children in care the option of permanent custody with their fit and willing relative(s).

      Section V - State Assessment Of Strengths And Needs

      Based on examination of the data in section III and the narrative responses in sections II & IV, the State review team should respond to the following questions.

      1. What specific strengths of the agency's programs has the team identified?

      Child Protective Services The goal of the Division of Family and Children Services (DFCS) Child Protective Services (CPS) program is to assure the protection and safety of children who are victims of abuse and neglect. Both State and Federal law mandate providing the protective services of the State, in situations of child maltreatment, to prevent further abuse, to protect and enhance the welfare of children and to preserve the family when possible. At major decision points throughout the CPS process (from receipt of a report until case closure), consideration of a family's need for referral to early intervention and other preventive services is made. The strengths of the DFCS CPS program are: The Georgia Department of Human Resources Commissioner's Task Force: This public/private partnership, established in late 1999, studied needs within the child welfare system and made recommendations to strengthen Georgia's child welfare system. Recommendations from the Task Force were instrumental in the Governor's FY 2002 budget that includes funding recommendations made by the Task Force. (For further detail see responses to question #5 Section IV/A-Safety and question #1 Section II/F-Agency Responsiveness to Community.) Early Intervention and Prevention Services: Additional early intervention funding is available to counties strengthening support services to families through community partnerships. Early intervention services are encouraged and strengthened at all stages of the CPS process. Also, Early Intervention provides support services to families who do not meet the criteria for a CPS investigation, but who are considered "at-risk". (For further detail see responses to questions #1, 2 and 4 Section IV/A-Safety.) Special Investigations Unit: A Special Investigations Unit (SIU) that works statewide assisting counties in investigation of serious injury and fatality cases has been established. This Unit is involved in establishment of district investigative teams. (For further detail see responses to questions #5 and 7 Section IV/A-Safety.) Enhanced Training Opportunities: With additional funding, the Division of Family and Children Services has been able to increase, strengthen and diversify the training curriculum for CPS and expose staff to experts in allied and related fields of expertise. Training efforts include collaborations among state CPS staff, the DFCS training unit, the Georgia Council on Child Abuse, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation and Georgia State University in Atlanta. (For further detail see the response to questions #5 Section IV/A-Satety.) Structured and Streamlined CPS Requirements: In 1998 and 1999, Georgia did incorporate a Structured Decision-Making (SDM) model into its CPS policy and procedure requirements. These changes help assure increased uniformity of CPS practice and increased contact standards throughout the State's 159 counties. Forms were streamlined during this process. (For further detail see responses to questions #1, 2 and 3 Section IV/A-Safety.) Research on High Risk Factors: DFCS is collaborating and funding a research project with the Rollins School of Public Health at Emory University in Atlanta to study high risk factors in families that lead to serious child injury and fatality. The results of this project will assist us to further refine our policy and training emphasis. (For further detail see the response to question #5 Section IV/A-Safety.) Reoccurrence of Maltreatment: At 4.22% for 1999, Georgia is below the national standard of 5% for the reoccurrence of child maltreatment. The state has been below this standard for the three profiled years. (For further detail see the response to question #6 Section IV/A-Safety.) Placement Services In 1999, Georgia instituted the First Placement/Best Placement (FP/BP) initiative to provide a comprehensive assessment strategy for all children entering foster care as well as their families. The FB/BP assessment focuses on early and continuous assessment of the strengths and needs of children and their families, case plan development with the family and the use of a "full continuum" of services that best meets the needs of children in the least restrictive setting possible. Comprehensive assessments thoroughly evaluate the child/youth and family's strengths and needs. The Multidisciplinary Team staffing (MDT's) is charged with making recommendations for placement decisions (the best placement the first time) and service provision (appropriate services along a full continuum that will assist the family in meeting its case plan and the permanency plan for the child). Family centered support services for safety and permanency (wrap-around services) are designed to support children and their families at any point along the full continuum. These services can be used to stabilize and strengthen families, to keep children from coming into care, to maintain and preserve placements and to provide stability in aftercare. The partnerships and collaborations of the public/private sector and foster parents involve and empower communities to take ownership of their children and families making First Placement/Best Placement successful in its results and outcomes for children and their families. The strengths of First Placement/Best Placement are: Every child entering foster care receives a comprehensive child/family assessment to assure that the developmental, psychological, educational, and medical needs are identified early on in the process of developing the case plan for on behalf of the child and the family; Georgia did initiate and continues recruitment of licensed professionals in the field of human services as FB/BP providers. These approved and trained providers complete the comprehensive assessments and culminate the process with participation on a Multidisciplinary Team staffing (MDT); MDT's are comprised of public/private individuals and agencies involved in the life of the child and/or family; and The MDT is charged with making appropriate placement recommendations for the child. Nine Principles of First Placement/Best Placement Assessment Driven - culminating in comprehensive child/youth and family assessments and online case planning. Safety focused - predicated on recommendations made in the Multidisciplinary Team staffing with a goal of the first placement being the best placement. Integrated services - achieved by way of collaborations with public/private partners, the Multidisciplinary Teams and family conferences. Systems approach - accomplished with involvement of Multidisciplinary Teams, private providers and families by focusing on goal identification in conferences. Partnerships with foster families - attained through Multidisciplinary Teams, family conferencing and the comprehensive child and family assessments. Partnerships with public/private agencies - attained through collaborations with private providers, Multidisciplinary Teams and ancillary supportive agencies. Results driven - compilations by the Rollins School of Public Heath at Emory University, Atlanta, GA and the Child Welfare Policy and Practice Group, Inc. Montgomery, AL. Respectful of culture - acknowledging racial, cultural, and ethnic identifiers as strategic components when considering placement resources. Participation - through family conferencing and evaluating surveys completed by foster parents, public/private agencies, private providers, birth parents and relatives. (For further detail see responses to question #2 Section II/B-Case Review System, question #5 Section IV/B-Permanency, questions #8 & 9 Section IV/B Permanency, questions #2, 3, 4 and 5 in Section IV/C-Child and Family Well-Being.) Additional strengths of the Placement Services program are: Multidisciplinary Team (MDT) Staffings: These are required following completion of comprehensive child and family assessments. The MDT is comprised of the private provider, DFCS staff persons (case manager, supervisor, or director) and any additional representatives of the child and/or family involved in the life of the child/family. The charge of the MDT is to review the assessment components and provide recommendations on placement appropriateness and service provision. (For further details see responses to question #2 Section II/B-Case Review System, question #5 Section IV/B-Permanency, and question #9 Section IV/B Permanency.) The Case Plan Reporting System (CPRS): The Online Case Plan is an Internet based data entry system developed in a collaborative effort between the Georgia Supreme Court, Georgia Technology Research Institute and the Department of Human Resources - Division of Family and Children Services. The CPRS will be used to complete Case Plans for every child entering care. (For further details see responses to question #1 Section II/B-Case Review System, questions #2 & 3 Section IV/C Child and Family Well-Being.) Public/Private Partnerships: Community stakeholders have been an integral part of DFCS planning and service delivery for many years. Stakeholders have been involved in planning, evaluating and reshaping the way families experience child welfare services in Georgia. The DFCS contracts with over 200 providers to deliver services to children and families. (For further details see responses to question #2 Section II/D-Staff and Provider Training, questions #1, 2 & 3 Section II/F-Agency Responsiveness to Community, question 4 Section II/G-Foster and Adoptive Home Licensing, Approval, and Recruitment, and question #4 Section IV/B Permanency.) Family Preservation and Wrap Around Services: Efforts to assure safe and permanent reunification for children are often complicated by the complex and interrelated problems many families' experience. No one agency or program has the resources or expertise to respond to the needs of all families that come in contact with the child welfare system. The degree to which DFCS has been effective in reuniting families has been largely dependent upon its ability to connect families with timely and appropriate supports and services resources from various agencies, and community-based organizations. (For further details see responses to question #1 Section II/E-Service Array and Resource Development, and questions #1 & 2 Section II/F-Agency Responsiveness to Community.) Foster Parent Training: DFCS requires prospective foster and adoptive parents approved through the county office to participate in Group Preparation Selection-Model Approach to Partnership in Parenting (GPS-MAPP). This is a preparation program that consists of a series of ten sessions totaling 30 classroom hours. Additionally, to maintain their approval status, foster parents must complete 15 hours of annual training. (For further details see the response to question #2 Section II/D-Staff and Provider Training.) Relative Care Subsidy: Georgia did not have legislation to allow juvenile court judges to award permanent custody to fit and willing relatives until 1998. This fact impacted the number of children remaining in the DFCS custody for extended periods. Georgia is currently developing a Relative Care Subsidy (RCS) program, which will enable DFCS to more quickly achieve permanency for a greater number of children.(For further details see responses to question #3 Section IV/B-Permanency and question #5 Section IV/C-Child and Family Well-Being.) Independent Living Program: Older children ages 16 to 21 who continue to be in foster care as adolescents become eligible for the State Independent Living Program (ILP). IL services are designed and provided by DFCS to help prepare adolescents for employment, post-secondary education, and successful management of adult responsibilities. (For further details see the response to question #11 Section IV/B-Permanency.) Office of Adoptions The Office of Adoptions was created in 1997 with a mission to develop and implement an efficient, outcome-based, quality, special needs adoption program that would identify and facilitate the elimination of barriers to adoption within the State. The continuous goals of the Office are to seek the assistance of sources outside state government to support innovative approaches to increase placements and resources for families, to develop inventive recruitment methods and to create a comprehensive network of community-based services to assist families after adoption. Great strides have been made toward carrying out the mission and goals of the office, creating several strengths for the State's adoption program. These strengths include: Public/Private Partnerships: Since its inception, the Office of Adoptions has pursued contractual partnerships with licensed private adoption agencies and other for-profit and non-profit organizations to provide services to children and families. (For further detail see responses to question #4 Section II/E-Service Array and Resource Development and question #1 Section II/G-Foster and Adoptive Home Licensing, Approval, and Recruitment.) Recruitment: Recruitment efforts have increased in both number and variety of activities. Efforts are geared toward general recruitment, public awareness and child specific recruitment. Outstanding recruitment activities include interactive adoption videoconferences, My Turn Now Photolisting, Wednesday's Child and statewide and local adoption galas and matching meetings. In addition to efforts in Georgia, a partnership with South Carolina allows recruitment across state jurisdictional lines. (For further detail see responses to questions #3 & 4 Section II/E-Service Array and Resource Development and questions #4 & 5 Section II/G-Foster and Adoptive Home Licensing, Approval, and Recruitment.) Training: There is now greater emphasis on effective training for DFCS staff, private providers and adoptive families. Two major curriculums were developed in partnership with the National Resource Center on Adoptions to train on providing post adoption services and assessing and preparing children for adoption. (For further detail see the response to question #2 Section II/D-Staff and Provider Training.) Increase in number of Children Adopted: We have increased the number of finalized adoptions by 32% from 1997 to 1999. Georgia was one of 35 states to receive the first award of an Adoption 2002 Excellence Award for increasing the number of finalized adoptions during federal fiscal year 1998. Georgia was also recognized again in 2000 for its innovative efforts supporting adoptive families and earnest commitment to achieving permanent placement for children. Georgia was one of only 12 recipients of the Adoption 2002 Excellence Award for the year 2000. (For further detail see the response to question #6 Section IV/B-Permanency.) Post Adoption Services: The development of post-adoption services is a major thrust for Georgia's adoption program. Building on two Adoption Opportunities Grants, post-adoption services have grown significantly. Families are able to access a variety of services designed specifically to increase theknowledge base and skills of adoptive families. (For further detail see the response to question #2 Section II/D-Staff and Provider Training.) Multi-Agency Team for Children (MATCH) MATCH is the Multi-Agency Team for children, which purchases residential treatment services for children and adolescents who are severely emotionally disturbed. Services include therapeutic foster care, therapeutic residential wilderness camps, and intermediate and intensive residential services. The Georgia Department of Human Resources (DHR) Division of Family and Children Services (DFCS) Treatment Unit does administer MATCH. Decisions about what treatment the children will receive are made by the State MATCH team, composed of representatives from DFCS, DHR's Division of Mental Health, Mental Retardation and Substance Abuse Services (MH,MR,SA), the Department of Education, and the Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ). Although MATCH can serve children referred by biological parents, adoptive parents, relatives or other ancillary sources, it is primarily a resource for children who are being served by public agencies. In 1999, 75% of the children served were in DFCS custody. Most entered the foster care system suffering from poor health, emotional and behavioral difficulties, speech and language problems, and school failure. Their basic needs for physical care, protection, and attention were not met prior to entering care. The strengths of the DFCS MATCH program are: Georgia DFCS participates in a coordinated multi-agency provider approval and oversight process. Private agencies providing residential care or foster care to children placed by DFCS are oriented, approved and monitored through a joint effort of the Office of Regulatory Services; the Division of Mental Health, Mental Retardation, and Substance Abuse; the Department of Juvenile Justice; and DFCS. Care for Georgia's most severely emotionally disturbed children is arranged through a multi-agency initiative - the Multi-Agency Team for Children (MATCH) program. MATCH is administered by DFCS, but decisions about the treatment children receive and the providers enrolled are made by the multi-agency team. MATCH serves children without regard to custody. Parents are able to receive needed services for their children without considering giving up custody. There are more than 100 local multi-agency teams where all options are considered and decisions are made for referral to state MATCH. MATCH is a public/private partnership - 95% of MATCH placements are with the private sector. Attributable to its continuum of services, MATCH has consistently met its goal of serving successfully serving all children in Georgia. MATCH has no children placed out of state. The public and private agencies that are part of the MATCH team jointly designed and implemented an outcome system to measure the effectiveness of the program in helping children improve their functioning and return to their families and communities. (For further detail see responses to question # 2 Section II/D-Staff and Provider Training and question #2 Section II/F-Agency Responsiveness to Community.) Evaluation and Reporting The DFCS Evaluation and Reporting Section (E & R) does conduct social services reviews in county departments that primarily focus on child safety, permanency for children, and funding issues that impact DFCS. When a county office is reviewed, E & R completes a comprehensive report outlining the findings of the review and giving recommendations which the county office uses to develop its corrective action plan. DFCS has had a Quality Assurance review process for Social Services Programs in place since 1991. The Quality Assurance process is flexible and responsive to changing needs. In February 2000, the Evaluation and Reporting/Social Services Unit was able to develop review guides and implement a review process to focus on child safety and permanency in response to an agency crisis. This is now known as the Child Safety Initiative and has been implemented statewide. The Child Safety Initiative involves a 100% case record review and requires immediate action to be taken on a case where child safety is in question. The Evaluation and Reporting Section's/Social Services Unit is a team of highly qualified, experienced, and professional staff. All members have several years of direct social services experience at a caseload and management level. Corrective Action Plans are developed in each county based on the recommendations made as a result of the findings. Corrective Action Plans are presented to the Division Director and monitored by the Consultation and Support Consultant and the Field Director. (For further detail see responses to questions #1 & 2 Section II/C-Quality Assurance System.) Miscellaneous Strengths of the Division of Family and Children Services Commencing in January 2000, the agency did create the Child Protective Service Task Force. Arising from the work of the Task Force, 21 recommendations were made to improve the State's ability to protect Georgia's children. Foster Care reform in Georgia has been underway for four years. This effort is greatly enhanced by the First Placement/Best Placement Initiative and the collaboration with over 100 private providers in all 159 counties in the State. The Children's Justice Act (CJA) provides grants to States to improve the investigation and prosecution of cases of child abuse and neglect. Since the inception of this Federal program, Georgia has consistently been the recipient of an annual award from CJA. To comply with Federal guidelines, Georgia maintains the Children's Justice Act Advisory Committee comprised of partners in the medical, judicial, and law enforcement communities. Georgia DFCS contracts with over 200 providers statewide to deliver services to children and families. These services include prevention activities and services designed to remedy the causes of abuse and neglect in families in addition to treating the effects of abuse on children. (For further detail on the proceeding four strengths the response to question #1 Section II/F-Agency Responsiveness to Community.) Georgia DFCS has excellent policy and procedural requirements to facilitate the delivery of child welfare services throughout the state. All policy and procedural requirements are based on sound social work practice, State statutes promulgated in the Official Code of Georgia Annotated (O.C.G.A.) and Federal law. The policy and procedural policy requirement manuals are continually provided to the 159 local county offices in hard copy and over the Internet. Updates to the manuals are provided via routine mailings of manual transmittals and online over the Internet. The DFCS Consultation and Support Unit (C & S) in the Social Services Section has a staffing complement of 21 Social Services Program Consultants who serve all 159 counties in Georgia. These program consultants are assigned to specific counties in the state and are available to staff cases, review files, interpret policy requirements and to train on newly developed policy and procedural requirements. The social service program consultants are experienced employees knowledgeable in the mandated social service program areas of Adult Protective Services, Child Protective Services, Foster Care and Placement Services and Adoption. Additionally, the DFCS Supervisory Mentor Unit comprised of 12 Social Service Program Consultant Mentors is charged with orienting, training, and educating new social service supervisors one-on-one in the county offices. Like their counterparts in the C & S Unit, the Mentors are seasoned, experienced social service employees who travel statewide to provide mentor services to new supervisors. Strengths and Needs of Georgia's Juvenile Courts The juvenile court process for child abuse and neglect cases (or child deprivation cases) was studied by the Supreme Court in a year long study in 1995-1996.  This study was possible due to a federal grant from the Court Improvement Project under the Department of Health and Human Services. See web site for the full report at http://www2.state.ga.us/Courts/supreme/cpp/. As a whole, the child deprivation process in Georgia's juvenile courts has many, many needs. Until the year 2000, Georgia's juvenile courts received no state funding while the superior court (adult court) received at least $300K per judge in state funds that covered salaries, overhead and other expenses.  This county funded system for juvenile courts led to great disparities in the system regarding judicial salaries, staffing, services, equipment, etc. Some of the wealthier counties were able to fund their juvenile courts well and some of the poorer counties (with high caseloads) were not.   In many ways, the process of recommending improvements became overwhelming because there were so many needs.  Thus, the Child Placement Project report narrowed itself to five key recommendations: More automation of court records for faster delivery of information as well as a gathering data for how well the system is working: Creation of standards of practice for all participants in juvenile court; Increased cross-training of participants in juvenile court for better understanding of policy, law and roles in the child protection system; Increased representation of parents and children in juvenile court; and State funding for juvenile court judges. The strengths of Georgia's juvenile courts have increased considerably since our study. There have always been dedicated judges in Georgia who over the years have worked long hours for low pay to serve their individual counties, but now Georgia is paying an acceptable salary for this work. In 2000, a law was passed to establish state funding and set a base salary of $85K for juvenile court judges. This funding allows for the appointment of at least one full-time judge in every judicial circuit, but also allows the flexibility for other combinations of judges, such as several part-time judges for multiple counties. Yet, juvenile courts still have far to go to catch up to the funding and status of superior. Other strengths include the Council of Juvenile Court Judges (CJCJ), which was established years ago to represent the state's juvenile court judges and to serve their membership. Today, the CJCJ has 18 employees. Over the past 3 years, the Supreme Court Child Placement Project has worked closely with the CJCJ to get new computers to all the juvenile courts, to create an automated case plan project and to create standards of practice for all the participants in child deprivation cases. Cross-training is on-going, currently done as one large annual conference and many small workshops around the state. The CJCJ has instituted judicial educational conferences twice a year to meet educational requirements. Many juvenile court judges have applied for individual grants to solve local problems. The juvenile court has created a benchbook written by judges and they have created mentoring programs for new judges. This information is available on the CJCJ's website, www.juvenilecourt.org. Office of the Child Advocate A significant development is the Office of Child Advocacy that began in July 2000. Through new legislation, this advocacy office has broad responsibility in oversight, review and recommendations of children's issues in Georgia. Created with the intent to provide advocacy and oversight for children, particularly neglected and abused children, this Office is playing an important role in shaping child welfare strategy, policy and service to families. The director, DeAlva Simms, is also a member of our Child Welfare Advisory Committee.

      2. What specific needs has the team identified that warrant further examination in the onsite review? Note which of these needs are the most critical to the outcomes under safety, permanency, and well-being for children and families in the State.

      Over the past five years, the Division of Family and Children Services has experienced considerable difficulty in retaining and recruiting social service case managers, supervisors and ancillary staff. Low-salaries, high caseloads and expanded liability have compounded this problem. In many counties across the State, it has not been uncommon for local departments to experience 100% turnover of their social service case managers within twelve-month periods. In some instances, complete turnover has occurred in six-month increments. There should be some improvement subsequent to implementation of the State's 2002 budget that does increase the number of positions and salaries. The need to recruit, train and retain competent staff is most critical to the outcomes of safety, permanency and well being for children and families in Georgia. With 159 counties, Georgia is a state of extremes. There are some extremely rich urban/suburban counties and some very impoverished rural counties. Consequently, there is not an equitable distribution of resources and systems to serve children and families. A good illustration of this dichotomy is in the judicial system. Each of the 159 counties or 48 judicial circuits elects or appoints judges to settle child welfare cases. These judges run the gamut from exclusive juvenile court judges to superior court judges hearing juvenile court cases while at the same time being responsible for trying a wide range of felony and civil cases. There are also counties or judicial circuits where state court judges or even probate court judges hear juvenile court cases. Consequently, there are myriad interpretations and applications of the state statutes that mandate disposition of child deprivation or termination of parental rights cases. This is most evident in the implementation of and adherence to the mandatory guidelines of the federal Adoptions and Safe Families Act (ASFA) and the corresponding State statutes set forth in Chapter 11 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated (O.C.G.A.) on Juvenile Proceedings and Parental Rights. Unfortunately, this has meant that some children entering the foster care system in Georgia remain in care longer than 12 to 18 months without finalization of their permanency goals. In some instances, judges refuse to accept permanency recommendations from DFCS, fail to have timely review or permanency hearings or continue parental reunification efforts indefinitely. Even though there are uniform rules for the operation of juvenile courts and the fact that Georgia has excellent law dictating point by point how child deprivation/termination of parental rights cases should proceed, judges across the State hearing child welfare cases retain judicial autonomy. Georgia and DFCS are in critical need of a state-of-the-art computer system for tracking child abuse cases. While there is an Internal Data System (IDS) for the retention and retrieval of data, the system is hampered by data entry errors. To remedy this problem, DFCS is developing the Georgia Statewide Automated Child Welfare Information System (GASACWIS). At present, there is no definitive time-line as to when GASACWIS will go online. DFCS needs a 1-800 reporting system to manage acceptance of child protective service referrals on a 24-hour seven-day a week basis. At present, each of the 159 county offices must provide CPS phone intake during normal business hours and an alternative phone coverage system at night and over the weekends. To address this problem, DFCS is working to create a centralized 1-800 reporting system linked with law enforcement. DFCS needs and would benefit from staffing levels and workload standards tied to CWLA standards. Further, continued improvements and additions to training opportunities would improve the quality of child welfare service delivery. The therapeutic continuum that is offered through the MATCH program is limited by the budgeted funding. There are children who need the therapeutic services provided by MATCH who cannot be served because funding is not available. There should be some improvement in the state fiscal year 2002, as the General Assembly appropriated funds to expand the number of children served by MATCH.

      3. Which three locations, e.g., counties or regions, in the State are most appropriate for examining the strengths and concerns noted above in the onsite review?

      Federal regulations require that one site be a major metropolitan area. In Georgia this will be Fulton County and the City of Atlanta. The recommendation has been made that Carroll and Toombs Counties serve as sites two and three.

      4. Comment on the statewide assessment process in terms of its usefulness to the State, involvement of the entire review team membership, and recommendations for revision.

      Since February 2000, the Division of Family and Children Services' Evaluation and Reporting (E & R) Section has been conducting county level Child Safety Reviews on 100% of the caseload. The reviews are completed on both child protective and placement services and on children free for adoption and foster homes. Standardized review guides are used for each program area. The review focuses on the quality of casework in terms of child safety, funding outcomes and permanency planning for children. The reviews provide a wealth of information on both the strengths and needs of Georgia's child welfare delivery system. With the information gained from these reviews, county departments develop comprehensive corrective action plans to address areas needing improvement. The statewide assessment process has already both reinforced and validated the 100% Child Safety Reviews conducted by the E & R Section. However, we recognize that ours is an internal review and, as such, can be subject to internal biases. The value of the statewide assessment process is that it affords an opportunity for our system to be examined by external partners who can offer a fresh, open, frank and candid assessment of the strengths, needs and limitations of Georgia's child welfare program. However, as designed, the statewide assessment process is both arduous and labor-intensive. It demands and consumes vast amounts of staff time and energy. Unfortunately, the people that must participate in the self-assessment are the very same people who are responsible for protecting and delivering critical services to Georgia's children and families. As you know, our system is no different than most others across the nation in that we too suffer from high staff turnover, dangerously large caseloads, worker burnout, and scarcity of needed resources. At the same time, we are experiencing closer public scrutiny because of some high profile child deaths. We fully support the statewide assessment, but believe we have a responsibility to try to balance the time and resources consumed by the process, with the time and resources needed to continue to serve our child welfare population while the assessment is taking place. We stand ready to work with you to strike such a balance.

      5. List the names and affiliations of the individuals who participated in the development of the statewide assessment (please specify their role).

      Federal Review Team The Division of Family and Children Services along with the Office of Adoptions developed a Federal Review Team that includes state staff, representatives from Fulton county staff, and community partners. This team has responsibility for the planning function of the federal review, e.g. Statewide Assessment and the On-site. The Date Team is a sub-component of the Federal Review Team and includes state staff and community partners. Their role is to provide feedback on the data profiles and other statistical data. Team members: Ruth Walker, Region IV Office Wilfred Hamm, Social Services Doris Walker, Foster Care Janet Manning, Social Services Elizabeth Bryant, Social Services Jim Hendricks, Mentors Program Dianne Sacks, Social Services Sonja Johnson, Training and Development Bessie Barnett, Consultant Ed Fuller, Evaluation and Reporting (E & R), DFCS Judy Fuller, Social Services Shelley Cyphers, E & R Brett Phillips, E & R Sarah Brownlee, Consultation and Support Rebecca Jarvis, Child Protective Services David Hellwig, Child Protective Services Velma McCray-Duncan, Office of Adoptions Vale Henson, Office of Adoptions LaMarva Ivory, Office of Adoptions Sandra Milhollin, Office of Adoptions Normer Adams, Georgia Association of Homes and Services Andy Barclay, Barton Child Law Clinic, Emory University John Carter, Emory University Michelle Barclay, Supreme Court of Georgia Michele Ozumba, Georgia CAPP Christine Brown, Fulton County DFCS Annette VanDevere, CFSR Coordinator State and National Technical Assistant Advisors Our state technical assistant advisors are distinguished experts in their fields. They represent such lofty institutions as Emory University, Rollins School of Public Health, University of Georgia, Georgia State University and the Barton Child Law Clinic. Their role is to provide consultation and support to the process and be part of our federal review team. Advisors: Andy Barclay, Barton Child Law and Policy Clinic, Emory University John Carter, Ph.D. MPH, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University James Gaudin, Ph.D., (retired from the University of Georgia) Peter Lyons, Ph.D., School of Social Work, Georgia State University Paul Vincent, The Child Welfare Policy and Practice Group Bessie Barnett, Federal Consultant Michael Petit, Child Welfare League of America Tom Hay, National Child Welfare Resource Center for Information and Technology Kris Sahonchik, National Child Welfare Resource Center for Organizational Improvement Edmund S. Muskie School of Public Service, University of Southern Maine IV-B Child Welfare Advisory Committee Below are the names of statewide committee members who represent a broad cross-section of the child welfare field including advocates, judges, legislators and providers. The role of the Advisory Committee is to: Respond to documentation and provide input Be intently involved in the review process, e.g. as reviewers, as interviewees, as respondents to surveys, etc. Assess the state's work to include all of its systems including the courts with the goal of strengthening our child welfare system Ensure accountability among all systems involved in child welfare, including "Asking the hard questions" Meets Title IV-B requirement for stakeholder involvement in child welfare planning Committee members: Verdell Daniels, President, Adoptive and Foster Parent Association of Georgia Cheryl Dresser, Deputy Director, Division of Community Programs Eric John, Executive Director, Council of Juvenile Court Judges Susan Maxwell, Executive Director, Georgia Child Care Council Toni Oliver, Executive Director, ROOTS Adoption Services Susan Phillips, Executive Director, Children's Trust Fund Sue Smith, Executive Director, Georgia Parent Support Normer Adams, Executive Director, Georgia Association of Homes and Services for Children Michelle Barclay, Director, Court Improvement Project Dan Elmore, Director, DFCS Community Services Judge Sanford Jones, Chief, Fulton County Juvenile Court Judge Nina Hickson, Fulton County Juvenile Court Judge Karen Baynes Galvin, Fulton County Juvenile Court Judge Nikki Marr, DeKalb County Juvenile Court Judge Robin Nash, DeKalb County Juvenile Court Judge Michael Key, Key, McCain and Gordy, P.C. Shawn Huff, Foster Care Systems Program Manager, United Way of Metropolitan Atlanta Andre Johnson, DeKalb County Juvenile Court Michele Ozumba, Policy Director, Georgia Campaign for Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention Laraine Vance, Transportation Planner Karen Worthington, Director, Barton Child Law and Policy Clinic, Emory University School of Law Dorcas Bowles, Clark Atlanta University, School of Social Work Felicia Anderson, Cobb County Community Services Board Duaine Hathaway, Executive Director, Court Appointed Special Advocates Marian Gamble, Family Connection Diane Burton, Families First Keith Bostick, Program Director, Casey Family Programs Eva Pattillo, Office of Child Fatality Review Representative Georganna Sinkfield, State Capitol, Room 416 DeAlvah Simms, Office of the Child Advocate Eric Kiesel, M.D., Ph.D., Deputy Medical Examiner, Fulton County Medical Examiner Office Vivian Egan, DFCS Legal Office Dawne Morgan, MHMRSA Jane Jones, Director, Cobb County DFCS David Kelley, DFCS Field Coordination Office II Zelma Smith, Child Welfare Institute Margaret Cone, Sr. Planner, Office of Planning and Budget Services

      ATTACHMENTS

      1. Organizational Charts

      • Department of Human Resources

      • Division of Family and Children Services

      • Office of Adoptions

      2. E & R Review Guide

      3. Discipline Policy

      4. Comprehensive Child and Family Assessment

      5. Survey Results

      • Placement

      • Providers

      • Youth Services

      • Foster Parents

      6. Guidelines for Georgia Courts in Child Deprivation Cases

      7. Aspirational Guidelines for Special Assistant Attorneys General in Child Deprivation Cases

      8. County Selection Procedure

      9. Child Safety Initiative Schedule

      Input from Staff and Stakeholders

      Group	Plan	Issues to Address
      Youth in care (March)	Statewide surveys	Support services, educational needs, physical and mental health needs
      Foster Parents (March) Douglas County Georgia	Surveys	*Social worker contact with child(ren), foster parents *Involvement in the development of case plans *Effectiveness of training in developing necessary skills *Factors that contribute to unplanned moves of children *Involvement of foster parents in court hearings
      DFCS staff, Judges, State Assistant Attorney Generals (March-April)	Statewide surveys via websites	*Effectiveness of services regarding placements *Effectiveness of services to reunify families *Contact with children, foster parents, and others
      Residential Providers (March-April)	Statewide surveys via website	*Cost issues *Provider contact with social workers *Transition planning
      IV-B Child Welfare Advisory Committee/CFSR Development Team (April)	Joint planning meetings	Focus on Permanency and Safety issues Child Welfare Planning

      This information is available at www.childwelfare.net.

      http://www2.state.ga.us/Departments/AUDIT/pao/fstrcare.htm

      http://www2.state.ga.us/Departments/AUDIT/pao/fstrcare.htm

      Statewide Assessment Georgia Department of Human Resources

      May 2001

      2