A Judicial Perspective on Differential Response Anthony Capizzi Montgomery County Juvenile Court Dayton, Ohio 45422-4240 September.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
DIFFERENTIAL RESPONSE Theresa Costello, MA Director National Resource Center for Child Protective Services (NRCCPS) March 16, 2009.
Advertisements

Moving Toward More Comprehensive Assessments American Humanes 2007 Conference on Differential Response Patricia Schene, Ph.D.
Differential Response and Data American Humane 2007 Conference on Differential Response in Child Welfare Patricia Schene, Ph.D.
Opening Doors: Federal Strategic Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness
Objectives Present overview & contrast different models of case management: broker, clinical, strengths based clinical Identify roles of engagement & collaboration.
2010 Conference on Differential Response 1 American Humane Association The nation’s voice for the protection of children & animals.
Ohio Alternative Response. WHAT IS AR? Referrals given to the agency for assessment. Read the referrals and decide whether you would screen this in or.
Presentation to: Georgia Child Welfare Reform Council Presenter: Jo Ann Lamm, MSW Date: August 5,
Denver Family Integrated Drug Court
The Child and Family Services Review: An Agenda for Change Kathy Yurchisin Krista Hudson Kentucky CFSR Stakeholders Advisory Group.
California Department of Social Services Program Improvement Plan
An Introduction To Grayson County’s Juvenile Problem Solving Court Honorable Brian Gary 397 th District Court.
Duty to Report Child Abuse, Neglect, and Dependency in North Carolina Janet Mason Institute of Government The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
2012 Indian Child Welfare Summit Tribal State Justice to Strengthen Indian Families Jackie Crow Shoe Differential Response and Indian Country.
1 Child and Family Services Review Program Improvement Plan Kick-Off Division/Staff Name Date (7/30/07)
Minnesota and Wisconsin CHIPS processes
1 CFSR STATEWIDE ASSESSMENT LESSONS LEARNED (State) CFSR Kick Off (Date)
Introduction to Outcomes Based Service Delivery in Southern Alberta David O’Brien MSW, RSW Southern Alberta Child and Family Services Authority.
Permanency Enhancement Project Peoria, Illinois Jennifer La Fever Elizabeth Morgan Amy Roman
1 Strengthening Child Welfare Supervision as a Key Practice Change Strategy Unit I: Helping Child Welfare Leaders Re-conceptualize Supervision.
North Carolina’s Multiple Response System and the Role of the GAL North Carolina Division of Social Services Child Welfare Services Section Charisse S.
Overview of the Child Welfare System International Center for Innovation in Domestic Violence Practice (ICIDVP)
Services and Resources Available for Families & Children.
May 18, MiTEAM Is Michigan’s guide to how staff, children, families, stakeholders and community partners work together to achieve outcomes that.
The Effective Management of Juvenile Sex Offenders in the Community Section 6: Reentry.
Oregon’s Community-Involved Approach to Differential Response Implementation.
Safe & Equitable Foster Care Reduction in Multnomah County CCFC Commission Mtg Tuesday, Dec 8 th 2009.
The 10 Key Components of Veteran’s Treatment Court Presented by: The Honorable Robert Russell.
Improving Outcomes for Minnesota Youth that Crossover between Child Welfare & Juvenile Justice.
9/2/20151 Ohio Family and Children First An overview of OFCF structure, membership, and responsibilities.
10/ Introduction to the MA Department of Children and Families’ Integrated Casework Practice Model (ICPM) Fall 2009.
CWS Stakeholders Summit May 16-17, 2002 CWS STAKEHOLDERS SUMMIT MAY 16, 2002 ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA.
It’s All About Attitude Presenters: Darleen Shope and Richard Tvaroch The most important thing that changed is what we believe about families… Dave Thompson.
A New Narrative for Child Welfare February 16, 2011 Bryan Samuels, Commissioner Administration on Children, Youth & Families.
An Overview for Staff, Community Providers and Stakeholders Shelley Straughan & Dana Torrey Safety & Reunification Coordinators Department of Human Services.
APAPDC National Safe Schools Framework Project. Aim of the project To assist schools with no or limited systemic support to align their policies, programs.
AMERICAN HUMANE ASSOCIATION The nation’s voice for the protection of children & animals THE CHILD WELFARE RESPONSE CONTINUUM CHRONIC ISSUES THAT HAVE PLAGUED.
The Child Welfare System An Introduction Child Welfare in Numbers Nationally, an estimated 896,000 children were determined to be victims of child abuse.
Maine DHHS: Putting Children First
Structured Decision Making Child Welfare and the Law Spring 2006.
1 CT’s DCF-Head Start Partnership Working Together to Serve Vulnerable Families & Support the Development of At-Risk Children Presenters: Rudy Brooks Former.
Judge Mark Pouley Commissioner Michelle Ressa October 9, 2012 ICW Summit.
Connecticut Department of Children and Families Agency Overview.
Richard P. Barth, PhD, MSW Presented to the Workshop on Child Maltreatment Research, Policy, and Practice for the Next Generation Washington, DC January,
SSIS as a Case Management Tool Nan Beman Anne Broskoff.
1 Quality Counts: Helping Improve Outcomes for Pennsylvania’s Children & Families September 22, 2008.
Mountains and Plains Child Welfare Implementation Center Maria Scannapieco, Ph.D. Professor & Director Center for Child Welfare UTA SSW National Resource.
Practice Area 1: Arrest, Identification, & Detention Practice Area 2: Decision Making Regarding Charges Practice Area 3: Case Assignment, Assessment &
Tehama Linkages Commitment Presented by LaDeena Coates, Employment & Training Worker, II Richard Phillips, Social Worker, II.
Using the Safe and Together ™ Model to Guide and Enhance Policy Related to Domestic Violence and Child Maltreatment Kristen Selleck, MSW David Mandel &Associates,
Mountains and Plains Child Welfare Implementation Center Maria Scannapieco, Ph.D. Professor & Director Center for Child Welfare UTA SSW Steven Preister,
Lessons from the Greenbook Initiative Jeffrey L. Edleson, Ph.D. University of Minnesota © 2011 Jeffrey L. Edleson.
NCADS Child Maltreatment 2000 Data about child abuse and neglect known to child protective Services (CPS) agencies in the United States in 2000.
ENHANCING POSITIVE WORKER INTERVENTIONS WITH CHILDREN AND THEIR FAMILIES IN PROTECTION SERVICES: BEST PRACTICES AND REQUIRED SKILLS.
IOWA PARTNERSHIPS Kara Hudson,CFSR State Coordinator (515) Michelle Muir, Executive Officer (515)
A NEW APPROACH TO CHILD PROTECTIVE INVESTIGATIONS ALTERNATIVE RESPONSE SYSTEMS DIFFERENTIAL RESPONSE SYSTEMS.
Oregon Youth Authority Meeting the Challenge through Collaboration and Partnerships Oregon´s juvenile justice system is composed of a network of local.
Work Group 3 Seamless System of Placement Options: Community Partnership Governor’s Action Group for Safe Children Work Group 3 Seamless System of Placement.
Unit 6. Effective Communication and Collaboration This unit focuses on efforts to reduce juvenile delinquency through a collaborative process of community-based,
Family Assessment Response. Welcome & Introduction Introduce yourself to the group: 1.Name 2.Work location 3.Work title 4.What is it about FAR that brought.
Public Children Services Association of Ohio SAFE CHILDREN, STABLE FAMILIES, SUPPORTIVE COMMUNITIES.
LOS ANGELES COUNTY. To learn about the Katie A. Settlement Agreement and its impact on the Child Welfare and Mental Health systems To appreciate the Shared.
CT’s DCF-Head Start Partnership Working Together to Serve Vulnerable Families & Support the Development of At-Risk Children Presenters: Rudy Brooks Former.
Lorain County Children Services
Educational Advocacy And The CASA Volunteer.
Lorain County Children Services
Tuolumne County Adult Child and Family Services
Texas Department of Family and Protective Services December 19, 2014
Senate Health and Human Services Committee
Human Trafficking and Child Welfare Services
Presentation transcript:

A Judicial Perspective on Differential Response Anthony Capizzi Montgomery County Juvenile Court Dayton, Ohio September 5, 2014

Montgomery County Juvenile Court Who We Are and Goals to Work Towards The Statistical Reality A Judicial Perspective on Differential Response Differential Response Ohio’s Differential Response System A Different Approach: Alternative Response Alternative Response – What? How? and Why? Learning Objectives

Dedicated to administering laws in a just and equal manner. Must be the catalyst in rallying the entire community to protect children by: 1)Being a leader in effective and cost-efficient utilization of community resources for the treatment of children and families. 2)Protecting the community by providing just and speedy consequences. 3)Being sensitive and responsive to individual victims and their families. Juvenile Court Goals

Montgomery County 2013 One of Ohio’s 88 counties Population: 536,000 - Youth under 18 years: 138,000 White persons: 73% - African-American persons: 20% Montgomery County Juvenile Court Judges: 2 – Magistrates: 10 Total Staff: 425 Programs/Services: Official and Unofficial Court, Probation, Detention, Intervention, CASA, Reclaiming Futures, Drug Court, Start Right The Statistical Reality

Delinquency9,3239,9889,451 Sex Offenses Abuse, Neglect, & Dependency 1,3631,0431,077 Custody/Visitation3,3603,7933,778 Permanent Custody Total14,16515,15414,581 MCJC Statistics by Year

Differential response is a child protection model that: Uses two or more separate response pathways for accepted reports of child abuse and neglect. Recognizes that an investigative response is not always the most productive for the family or beneficial for the child. Provides an “alternative” to the traditional child protection investigative response. Focuses on achieving safety through enhanced family engagement. What is Differential Response?

The traditional child protection investigative response is frequently perceived as overly adversarial or accusatory. The majority of investigations do not result in services being provided. Focus on substantiation and identifying a perpetrator does not contribute to a family’s readiness to engage in services. Differential response often results in greater success in identifying, building, and coordinating both formal and informal services and supports. Why Implement Differential Response?

2004 – Supreme Court of Ohio established the Subcommittee on Responding to Child Abuse, Neglect, and Dependency to develop and implement legislation to improve Ohio’s system for accepting and investigating reports of child abuse and neglect 2008 –Pilot programs in 10 of Ohio’s 88 counties 2011 –Enactment of legislation authorizing statewide implementation 2014 – Statewide implementation Implementation of Differential Response in Ohio

Leadership and Prioritization Partnerships Shared sense of ownership of and commitment to desired outcomes Investment, specialized supports and dedicated resources Elements Critical to the Success of DR in Ohio

Accepted Report of Child Abuse/Neglect Traditional Response: Investigation Alternative Response: Safety and Family Assessment Family Not in Need of (or Declines) Service Model Family Agrees to Service Model – Family Engagement and Community- Based Services Unsubstantiated Abuse/Neglect Substantiated Abuse/Neglect ad Exit System Transferred to an Ongoing Unit – Mandated Services ad Exit System Ohio’s Differential Response System Pathway Assignment

Alternative vs. Traditional Response Traditional Response Child Safety, Permanency, and Well-Being Investigation Mandated Service Model Incident Focused Rule Compliance Identification of Victim and Perpetrator Disposition of Substantiated, Indicated, or Unsubstantiated Multiple Workers Alternative Response Child Safety, Permanency, and Well-Being Assessment Agreement to Service Model Strengths/Needs Focused Family Engagement/Solution Focused No Labels No Disposition One Worker

The Goal Provide an alternative method of achieving child safety, permanency, and well-being, in cases where child abuse/neglect is reported. It’s All About Identifying Concerns and Finding Solutions Not Assigning Blame or Finding Fault Increased Family Contact Access to Community Service Providers Family Engagement and Collaboration Attitude and Willingness to Work Together Partnerships and Mutual Accountability A Different Approach: Alternative Response

What is Alternative Response? Alternative Response IS Child welfare practice that promotes child safety, well-being, and permanency. Alternative service track for reports of child abuse/neglect. Flexible, family-centered, service model capable of meeting the unique needs of each family. Comprehensive evaluation of child safety, risk of subsequent harm, and family strengths/needs. Community approach to providing up-front services to each family without formal determination of abuse or neglect.

What is Alternative Response? Alternative Response IS NOT Service model for all families Replacement for current Child Welfare Investigation Services Service option for abuse/neglect cases involving: o Sex abuse o Serious injury or hospitalization o Charges of criminal abuse/neglect

Non-confrontational initial family contact Provide up-front support services Engage the family – Strive towards a working partnership Coordinate and involve service providers in the community Remove barriers to the client-worker relationship o Voluntary agreement to many services o No labels or disposition o Focus on family strengths and finding solutions – Not on the incident How to Use Alternative Response

National, State, and Local Outcome Data Confirms: Child safety is NOT compromised o Fewer children enter foster care o No increase in repeat maltreatment calls Rapid implementation of up-front service Fewer court filings – courts have more time to focus on the cases that actually require judicial involvement After implementation/training, length of Agency involvement could be similar to Traditional Response (if not shorter) Improved client and staff satisfaction Why Use Alternative Response?

To Honor Their Souls

Questions