1. www.nccd-crc.org Children’s Research Center A nonprofit social research organization and division of the National Council on Crime and Delinquency www.nccd-crc.org Module Five: Introduction to Mapping Integrated Safety-Organized Practice Training Integrated Safety-Organized Practice Training

2. Steve Edwards Andrew Turnell …and we hope YOU will continue to build on these ideas and approaches. Sonja Parker CRC Staff Insoo Kim Berg Steve de Shazer Our Thinking Draws From the Legacy of Others Rob Sawyer Sue Lohrbach Carver County John Vogel Sophia Chin Heather Meitner Nicki Weld Susie Essex

3. Safety-Organized Practice Safety is: Actions of protection taken by the caregiver that mitigate the danger demonstrated over time. Adapted from Boffa, J., & Podesta, H. (2004) Partnership and risk assessment in child protection practice, Protecting Children, 19(2): 36–48. Turnell, Andrew & Susie Essex Working with Denied Child Abuse, Open University Press, 2006.

4. Agreements “Try on.” Everyone always has the right to pass. Know that silence is a contribution. We agree to share airtime and stick to time limits. We agree to speak personally, for ourselves as individuals. We agree to disagree and to avoid making assumptions or generalities. We agree to allow others to finish speaking before we speak and avoid interrupting and side conversations. We will all work together to hold to these agreements and authorize the trainer to hold us to them.

5. ModuleSubject 1Interviewing for Safety and Danger 2Three Questions to Organize Your Practice 3Small Voices, Big Impact: Keeping Children at the Center of the Work 4Solution-focused Inquiry 5Introduction to Mapping 6Harm Statements, Danger Statements and Safety Goals 7Mapping With Families 8Safety Networks 9Safety Planning 10Landing Safety-Organized Practice in Everyday Work 11 Organizational Environments: Reflection, Appreciation, and Ongoing Learning 12Summary and Looking to the Future

6. Interviewing for Safety & Danger 3 Questions to Organize Your Practice Small Voices, Big Impact Solution- Focused Inquiry Introduction to Mapping Practice Depth

7. Let’s Review and Reflect! What have you tried from the module last month? What worked well? What were your challenges? How did you handle those challenges?

8. Agenda What Is Mapping? Components in Mapping: A Quick Review Three Column or Four Quadrant? Connections with the SDM System Practice!

9. What is Mapping?

10. Mapping: Why, what, when, how!! Turnell & Edwards, 1999; Chin, S., Decter, P., Madsen, W., & Vogel, J. (2010). Enhancing Risk Assessment Through Organizational Learning: A Mid-Stream Report From Massachusetts. Protecting Children, 25(3): 7–20. Department of Child Protection (2011). The Signs of Safety Child Protection Practice Framework. Department of Child Protection, Perth. Retrieved from http:// http://www.signsofsafety.net/westernaustraliahttp://www.signsofsafety.net/westernaustralia

11. Think about a time you made a decision about danger or safety for a child, and you thought it went really well. Introductory Exercise

12. Now think about a time you or someone else from the agency made a decision about danger or safety for a child, and it did not go as well as you hoped. Introductory Exercise

13. What makes the difference?

14. What helps make good decisions? Mapping Collaboration Organization Common language Group agreement The SDM ® System Consistency Making sure we cover important areas we might otherwise miss (research-based) +

15. What Is Mapping?

16. It’s a Process To: Gather information What are we worried about? What is working well? What needs to happen? Organize information Harm versus complicating factors Safety versus strengths Clear statements about the danger Move to joint agreements Clear goals and next steps that will let everyone know the child will be safe Move from “assessment on” to “assessment with”!

17. Mapping Assumption #1 Trauma-informed practice reminds us that most healing takes place in the context of safe and trusting relationships. Relationships are the most significant factor in promoting child safety, permanency, and well-being. Mapping can help us to critically think through a case AND to determine better ways to improve our partnerships with families to build safety for children.

18. The words we use matter. Building a series of shared commitments to action requires that we share some common language. Mapping Assumption #2 Trauma-informed practice reminds us that people can be triggered by the words we use. Speaking and writing with behavioral detail vs. using labels or jargon is STEP ONE in fair and equitable practice

19. Organizing information about safety and danger to children is not easy – it can be hard to “admit we might be wrong.” Mapping Assumption #3 Trauma-informed practice reminds us that once we take trauma into account, our assessment might change.

20. The more that information is effectively organized with all the key people involved, the more likely it is effective action will be taken and upheld. Mapping Assumption #4 Trauma-informed practice reminds us that when people are empowered, they can begin to regain a sense of mastery over their trauma and their lives.

21. When Should We Map? Say! I like mapping! I do!! I like mapping, Sam-I-am! And I would map in a boat! And I would map with a goat... And I will map in the rain. And in the dark. And on a train. And in a car. And in a tree. Maps are so good so good you see! So I will map in a box. And I will map with a fox. And I will map in a house. And I will map with a mouse. And I will map here and there. Say! I will map ANYWHERE! Based on Dr. Seuss

22. Seriously, When Should We Map? Mapping session (with multiple stakeholders at the office) Case consult (“express map”) Supervision (frames the conversation) With families and providers in the field Guide conversations Organize information Develop goals Monitor progress

23. How Many Maps? You might have one map that you keep adding to over the life of the case. In other situations, you might have an internal map and a map you create with the family Or, you might have a series of different maps with a family that are addressing different topic areas, such as: »The overall danger to safety map »A map that addresses placement issues »Et Cetera

24. COMPONENTS IN MAPPING: A Quick Review

25. Essential Question What are the worries? What’s working well? What happens next? Are the children safe? SFQ’s Impact Detail Position Sort SDM SFQ’s Impact Detail Position Sort SDM SFQ’s Impact Detail Position Sort SDM

26. The First Two Questions What are the worries? What is working well?

27. Basic Terms: What Are We Worried About?

28. Distinguishing Harm and Complicating Factors

29. Harm Mrs. Jones, Susie’s mother Drinks alcohol every day and cannot drive anymore because her licence was revoked Then drives her 16- year-old to school while intoxicated and runs her car up onto the sidewalk, bruising her.

30. Complicating Factors

31. Basic Terms: What Is Working Well? Strengths Skills of living, nurturing or support that are important but do not directly address the harm/danger. Protective Capacities Demonstrated abilities/ qualities that could be used to create safety. Demonstrated abilities/ qualities that could be used to create safety. Safety Acts of protection taken by the caregiver that mitigate the danger, demonstrated over time.

32. Safety and Strengths All families have some signs of safety. The best predictor of future protection is past protection. Without searching for examples of protection it will be difficult to know the extent of the signs of danger, or to determine how protection could be enhanced and measured in the present and future. With safety, the key is to consider the definition: Are these actions of protection demonstrated over time? Or are these good things, helpful things, but maybe not safety?

33. Distinguishing Safety and Strengths

34. Safety

35. Strengths

37. Three-column or Four-quadrant?

38. Department of Child Protection. (2011). The Signs of Safety Child Protection Practice Framework. Department of Child Protection, Perth. Retrieved from http://www.signsofsafety.net/westernaustraliahttp://www.signsofsafety.net/westernaustralia Three-column Mapping What Are We Worried About? What’s Working Well?What Needs to Happen Next? Harm, Danger, and Complicating Factors: Safety, protective capacities, and strengths : Creating and sharing a danger statement; enhancing a safety network, safety planning:

39. Chin, S., Decter, P., Madsen, W., & Vogel, J. (2010). Enhancing Risk Assessment Through Organizational Learning: A Mid-Stream Report From Massachusetts. Protecting Children, 25(3): 7–20. Based on Turnell, A. & Edwards S. (1999). Signs of Safety. New York: Norton WHAT ARE WE WORRIED ABOUT?WHAT IS WORKING WELL? Harm and Danger:Safety: Complicating Factors:Strengths/Protective Capacity: (Put a star by the PCs, or put them in another color to call them out) WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN NEXT? Creating and sharing danger statements, enhancing the safety network, and safety planning 0 Danger 10 Safety

40. Suicide attempt by gas in the kitchen while the kids were home Her father was physically abusive and dangerous Foster Care Poverty DVDV DEPRESSIONDEPRESSION OFFMEDSOFFMEDS Past PresentFuture Mapping

41. “I took the girls and put them in the next room.” “My mom gave custody of me to my aunt.” “My mom and aunt made sure I got an education.” Approp. care of girls w/ school, MD, therapy “I’m getting up at 4am to meet them and get them off to school.” LEFTHUSBLEFTHUSB Past PresentFuture Mapping

42. What are we worried about? What’s working well? What needs to happen next? Turning on gas with children at home. Cheryl has not been getting out of bed. Cheryl lost her job and can’t pay her bills. Cheryl’s ex-husband hit her in front of the girls last year. Putting children in other room MD and school say mom meets kids’ basic needs Left husband after he hit her Got education Held job for long time Danger statements Expanding the safety network Safety planning 0 Danger 10 Safety

43. WHAT ARE WE WORRIED ABOUT?WHAT’S WORKING WELL? Harm and Danger: Turning on gas w/children at home Safety: Complicating Factors: Cheryl has not been getting out of bed. Cheryl lost her job and can’t pay her bills. Cheryl’s ex-husband hit her in front of the girls last year. Strengths/Protective Capacity: Putting children in next room (protective capacity – needs “mitigate danger” and “demonstrate over time”) MD and school say mom meets kids’ basic needs Left husband after he hit her Got education Held job for long time What Needs to Happen Next? 0 Danger 10 Safety

44. For those of you who have been at trainings or mappings in the past: What have you tried? What are you learning about this? »What works well? »Where are the challenges and roadblocks? »What have you done to try to respond to those challenges? »What do you think is important for those who have not tried this yet, to understand? Stories From the field

45. Connections With The SDM ® System

46. SDM ® System: Reminders Developed by the Children’s Research Center (CRC) in mid-1980s Now used in the U.S., Canada, Australia, and Bermuda Refers to a suite of decision support tools and related case management decisions Objectives of the SDM system are to: » Identify crucial decision points in child welfare casework » Increase consistency in decision-making » Increase accuracy of decision-making » Target resources to families most at need (through different responses to the different scored levels of risk) “Tools don’t make decisions, people make decisions.”

47. Distinguishing SDM ® Assessments Safety Assessment Immediate Serious caregiver actions that are impacting the child Guides decisions about placement Risk Assessment Longer time horizon Describes statistical probability of future A/N Guides decisions about case open/close Needs (FSNA) Barriers to increased safety and reduced risk Focus of intervention Guides construction of case plan

49. It’s Not An Interview Guide Item A9: Is the primary caregiver domineering?

50. It’s Not A Crystal Ball

51. Using the SDM system is HARDER than it looks, but maybe not why you think!

52. Two modes of thinking… LEFT left right RIGHT left LEFT right

53. Two modes of thinking… upper lower LOWER upper UPPER lower upper

54. Two Modes of Thinking System 1 Strengths: “Intuitive” Automatic Feels effortless Quickly recognizes patterns Attuned to norms Weaknesses: Very open to bias Overconfident Invisible Impulsive Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking Fast and Slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

55. Two Modes of Thinking System 2 Strengths: “Analytic” Visible and recordable Purposeful reflection Handles complex math and unusual problems Weaknesses: Slow Takes physiological effort Limited ability to use alongside other activities Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking Fast and Slow. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.

56. We Need the Best Of All Our Thinking Harm:Safety: Complicating Factor: Strengths:

57. We Need Both! Use in the field Family-centered Shared language for professionals, family members, anyone involved with the family Process for helping everyone involved organize their intuition, judgment and move to joint agreements Formal Tools Typically documented in the office Consistency and reliability (definitions) Equity (the same questions for each family) Provides aggregate data Process for bringing the best of research to check our intuition Map

58. How Do They Work Together? Safety Assessment Risk Assessment FSNA Reunification Assessment Safety-Organized Practice Principles Solution-focused Interviewing, Mapping, Three Houses, Danger Statements, Goal Statements, Expanding Networks, Safety Planning Is the child safe right now? How likely will this family come back to our attention? What may get in the way of future safety? Can the child go home?

59. Strengths: What is working well?What are we worried about? Complicating Factors: Safety: Harm: What needs to happen next? How They Work Together: What is the scope of our interview?

60. Strengths: What is working well?What are we worried about? Complicating Factors: Safety: Harm: What needs to happen next? How They Work Together: What is our agreed-upon threshold?

61. The Voice of SDM ® Check your handout!

62. Practice!

63. Kim 32 ? Allegation of substance abuse. Kim passed out while shooting heroin and cooking dinner. Paul was home. CWS filed a petition and Paul goes to live with his aunt Donna and her wife Ann. 10 Donna 39 Ann 40 Paul Kim and Paul: A Story From the Field

64. Kim overdosed on heroin and became unconscious while cooking dinner. Ten-year-old Paul was home at the time and he was really scared when he couldn’t wake his mom. Her landlady heard the fire alarm and had to call the police and open the door. Kim has an extensive history of heroin use in the past and reports that she has been struggling with addiction “for more than 15 years.” This led to one CWS referral four years ago when Paul came to school multiple days smelling of urine and feces. Kim attributes this incident to a growing depression after losing her job as a saleswoman at a department store. She has been looking for work for more than 14 weeks without finding anything. Both Donna and Ann confirm this. Kim stopped attending NA over two years ago (“They get kind of preachy, and the meetings were not good times”). Kim has been diagnosed with Borderline Personality Disorder, and ADD. What Are We Worried About? Which SDM safety threats might apply?

65. “I'm doing what I need to do and don’t know why my son has not been able to come back yet!” “I’m worried about my son growing up without his mom and want him back.” “I appreciate my sister’s help but Donna can be ‘a know it all,’ and it’s hard to work with her sometimes on Paul's care.” What Is Kim Worried About?

66. Kim reports she has been clean and sober for four years before this incident—a report supported by her sister Donna—during which time Paul has come to school clean, on time and with his work done. In her past work with CWS, Kim worked with her worker and a home-based outreach team, went into drug treatment and ensured that Paul went to school and was appropriately clothed and bathed. Paul was able to go into a kinship foster placement with his aunt Donna and her wife Ann. He was able to stay in the same school system and it is reported by the aunt and school guidance counselor that he continues to ‘thrive’ despite these changes. Kim had made a plan with Donna in the past that if anything were to happen to her Paul should go to stay with her. What Is Going Well?

67. Kim has attended drug treatment in the past including detox (more than five times) and inpatient substance abuse treatment (two times before this incident). She completed an inpatient stay after this incident and now attends NA meetings. She has a relapse plan and is able to talk openly about it. Donna and Ann have been helping Kim financially and report they are willing and able to continue to do so. Kim is in individual treatment and has been regularly attending. She reports that she takes her Ritalin and Celexa regularly. Kim: “I want Paul back and will do whatever it takes to make that happen.” Paul: “I love my mom and want to be back with her.” Donna and Ann: “Kim is a great mom. She had been doing really well and we think she can be clean and sober again.” School: “We hadn’t seen any problems since Paul has been at this school.” What Is Going Well?

68. Kim overdosed on heroin and became unconscious while cooking dinner. Ten-year-old Paul was home at the time and he was really scared when he couldn’t wake his mom. Her landlady heard the fire alarm and had to call the police and open the door. »Harm, danger, or complicating factor? Making Sense of What We Learn

69. Kim has been diagnosed with Borderline Personality Disorder and Attention Deficit Disorder. Harm, danger, or complicating factor? Making Sense of What We Learn

70. Kim reports she has been clean and sober for four years before this incident—a report supported by her sister Donna—during which time Paul has come to school clean, on time and with his work done Safety, protective capacity, or strength? Making Sense of What We Learn

71. Kim is in individual treatment and has been regularly attending. She reports that she takes her Ritalin and Celexa regularly. Safety, protective capacity, or strength? Making Sense of What We Learn

72. Working With Your Own Case What are you worried about?What is working well?

73. Working With Your Own Case CaregiverBehavior Impact on the child What are you worried about?What is working well?

74. *Turnell, A. and Edwards S. (1999). Signs of Safety. New York: Norton

75. Helps us all “think our way through” complexity, ambiguity and contradiction in this work. Helps us develop a common language across multiple lines: families, providers, workers, supervisors, managers. Positions us toward “shared agreements” in next steps for enhancing safety for children. When connected with the SDM system, creates a process that brings both the best of our intuitive thinking and the best of our analytic thinking together. Mapping Summary

76. “Completing the Signs of Safety framework is, in the end, simply a process of creating a map of the circumstances surrounding a vulnerable child. As with all maps, the Signs of Safety map needs always to be seen as a mechanism to arrive at a destination. That destination is rigorous, sustainable, everyday child safety in the actual home and places where the child lives.” Andrew Turnell Mapping Summary

77. One Last Thing: Thinking Ahead In pairs: What is one thing you heard today that you value or makes sense to you? What are you already doing to put that into action in your work? What else would you like to do to “land it” even more in your work between now and next time?

78. Opportunities for Practice

79. References Chin, S., Decter, P., Madsen, W., & Vogel, J. (2010). Enhancing Risk Assessment Through Organizational Learning: A Mid-Stream Report From Massachusetts. Protecting Children, 25(3): 7–20. Department of Child Protection. (2011). The Signs of Safety Child Protection Practice Framework. Department of Child Protection, Perth. Retrieved from http://www.signsofsafety.net/westernaustralia Lohrbach, S. (2000). Child Protection Practice Framework – Consultation and Information Sharing. Unpublished manuscript. Munro, E. (2006). Effective Child Protection. London: Sage. Rycus, J. S., & Hughes, R. C. (2007). Issues in risk assessment in child protective services. Journal of Public Child Welfare, 1(1), 85–116. Turnell, A. & Edwards S. (1999). Signs of Safety. New York: Norton. Child Protection Messages from Research (1995). Studies in Child Protection HMSO: London. http://www.nctsn.org/resources/topics/creating-trauma-informed-systems Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking Fast and Slow. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux. Seuss, D., Green Eggs and Ham. Random House.