Children’s Bureau
Child and Family Services Reviews
Program Improvement Plan
Instructions and Matrix
October 2007
Table of Contents
Requirements of the PIP 2
PIP Content 2
PIP Timeframes 3
PIP Approval 4
PIP Monitoring and Evaluation 5
PIP Renegotiation 6
II. Strategies for Developing the
PIP 6
Children’s Bureau Support to the States 6
PIP Planning 7
Managing Change 9
Collaborating During the PIP ……………………… 10
Measuring Improvements 11
Using a QA Approach 12
III. TA With the PIP 13
IV. Suggested PIP Format 13
Attachment A: PIP Suggested Standard Format 15
I. PIP General Information 15
II. PIP Strategy Summary and TA Plan, Matrix Instructions, and
Quality Assurance Checklist 17
III. PIP Agreement Form 23
IV. PIP Matrix 25
Attachment B: Elements of an Effective PIP Process 32
Attachment C: Sample PIP Strategy Summary and TA Plan 36
Attachment D: Sample Completed Section of a PIP Matrix 37
Attachment E: List of CFSR Outcomes and Systemic Factors, and Associated Items, Data Indicators, and Data Composites 66
Attachment F: Child and Family Services Review Technical Bulletin #4 71
Instructions on Developing a
Program Improvement Plan
October 2007
Creating positive change in child welfare systems is the ultimate goal of the Federal Child and Family Services Reviews (CFSRs). During the two phases of the review process, the Federal and State Governments work in collaboration to assess how well State child welfare agency strategies are achieving positive outcomes for children and families. States then develop a Program Improvement Plan (PIP) to address areas in which they were found to be out of conformity with any one of the seven outcomes or seven systemic factors under review.
The PIP planning and implementation process is perhaps the most important component of the CFSR. It is intended to be an extension of the collaborative planning process that States use to develop the
5-year Child and Family Services Plan (CFSP). State child welfare agencies involve their staff and external partners in assessing the CFSR findings and then preparing, implementing, and evaluating the PIP. Through the PIP process, State agencies also can build their capacity to conduct continuous quality improvement activities.
The purpose of this document is to provide guidance to States on developing PIPs in response to the CFSR findings. This guidance, which originally was produced in 2002 for the first round of CFSRs, has been updated for use during the second round of reviews.
Although the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) does not require the use of any particular PIP format, this guidance document presents a suggested format for preparing a PIP. More important, it outlines the content or elements that must be included in the PIP regardless of the format used by the State, as noted in the regulations at 45 CFR 1355.35. These requirements are described in the guidance below, which is organized as follows:
Strategies for Developing the PIP
Technical
Assistance (TA) with the PIP
Suggested PIP Format (for updated information regarding the PIP format, see attachment F, “Child and Family Services Review Technical Bulletin #4”)
I. Requirements of the PIP
PIP Content
States must work jointly with the Children’s Bureau Regional Office, in consultation with the Children’s Bureau Central Office, to develop the content of the PIP. Suggested strategies for doing so are discussed in section II of this document, Strategies for Developing the PIP.
The following information is required content for the PIP. The document should provide sufficient detail and context to ensure that the Children’s Bureau Regional Office and State agency staff can work in partnership to monitor PIP progress in implementing and completing the PIP.
The PIP must include measurable goals of improvement, action steps, and a timeframe for addressing each outcome that has been found to be out of substantial conformity. Specifically, the PIP must address the onsite performance indicators (items) and statewide data indicators that contributed to the low achievement level of that outcome, as noted in the Final Report.
In prioritizing issues to be addressed in the PIP, the State must address first items and outcome areas that affect child safety, followed by those most egregiously not in substantial conformity. The PIP should address these areas through both short-term goals (to minimize the negative effects on children and families immediately) and long-term goals (plans for lasting reforms). The priority assigned to these issues should be reflected in the PIP timeframes, rather than the order in which those issues are identified in the PIP document.
The PIP must include a specific percentage of improvement (goal) that will be achieved through the PIP for each statewide data indicator that does not meet the national standards. If the amount of progress to be achieved through the PIP does not reach the established national standards, the amount negotiated between the Children’s Bureau Regional Office and the State must be significant enough to move the State toward conformance with the national standards in a reasonable period. (Refer to the 2006 State Data Profile Toolkit from the National Resource Center for Child Welfare Data and Technology, available at http://www.nrccwdt.org/cfsr/cfsr_toolkit.html, for guidance on the amount of improvement necessary with regard to the data indicators and the national standards.)
The PIP must include measurable goals of improvement, action steps, and a timeframe for addressing each outcome and systemic factor found not to be in substantial conformity. The PIP must address the State plan requirements that contributed to a determination of nonconformity for each systemic factor, as noted in the Final Report. Similarly, the PIP must address each case review item or related data indicator that contributed to a determination of nonconformity for each applicable Outcome.
The PIP must include benchmarks of progress toward achieving the broader goals of the plan. Benchmarks are a regulatory requirement, but more important, they provide the Children’s Bureau and the State with interim measures of progress. These benchmarks enable the State and the Children’s Bureau Regional Office to measure progress and to assess the effectiveness of the State’s strategies for program improvement.
The PIP should identify the individual(s) responsible for undertaking each action step. (This is not a regulatory requirement, but should be included when possible to assist in ensuring successful completion of the PIP.)
The PIP should specify the geographic areas of the State in which the action steps will be undertaken and an explanation of how the plan will lead to positive outcomes and adequate functioning of the systemic factors statewide, if needed. (This is not a regulatory requirement, but should be included when possible to ensure that the requirements subject to review are in place throughout the State.)
The PIP must describe the State’s plan for accessing TA resources to support program improvements (for each outcome and systemic factor).
The PIP must include a description of how PIP progress will be evaluated by the State and reported to the Children’s Bureau Regional Office (including a schedule for submitting progress reports to the Regional Office).
The State must incorporate elements of the PIP into the goals and objectives of the CFSP and address its progress in implementing the PIP in the Annual Progress and Services Report (APSR) (45 CFR 1355.35(f)). Evidence of that requirement is expected to appear in the CFSP and the APSR. See ACYF-CB-PI-05-04, available at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/laws_policies/policy/pi/pi0504.htm, for more information on the integration of the CFSP, APSR, and PIP.
The following timeframes apply to the PIP development and implementation process:
The State must submit the PIP to the Children’s Bureau Regional Office for approval within 90 calendar days from the date that the State receives written notification from the Children’s Bureau Regional Office that it is not operating in substantial conformity on any one of the seven outcomes or seven systemic factors. The State’s receipt of the courtesy copy of the Final Report will constitute the written notification since the courtesy copy serves as the notification to the State regarding substantial conformity.
Although there is no regulatory timeframe within which the Children’s Bureau Regional Office must review and approve the PIP, the Regional Office will give prompt attention to
the PIP when it is submitted and take the minimum amount of time necessary to review it and respond to the State.
If the PIP is not approved by the Children’s Bureau Regional Office, the State must submit a revised PIP to the Regional Office within 30 calendar days of receiving written notice from the Regional Office that the State’s PIP was not approved. (Note: If the State does not submit a revised plan or the plan is not in accordance with the specified guidelines, withholding of funds will begin as outlined in 45 CFR 1355.36.)
The timeframe for completing the implementation of the PIP may not exceed 2 years from the date that the PIP is approved by the Children’s Bureau Regional Office. Not all elements of the PIP may require this length of time to address, and the 2 years is, therefore, an outside time limit for those elements requiring more extensive planning and action. For issues affecting child safety, improvements must be addressed in less than 2 years.
Although extensions to the 2-year timeframe for completing the PIP are rarely granted, there may be circumstances in which extensions, not to exceed 1 year, may be approved. States may request up to a 1-year extension to the 2-year timeframe for completing the implementation of the PIP, subject to approval by the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Requests for extensions should be linked to specific strategies within the PIP requiring additional time and must be submitted to the Children’s Bureau Regional Office in writing, with supporting documentation, at least 60 days before the approved PIP implementation completion date. Requests for extensions will be approved only in exceptional situations.
PIP Approval
States will submit a copy of the PIP document electronically to the Children’s Bureau Regional Office lead contact for the State. The Regional Office will submit a copy of the PIP to the Children’s Bureau Central Office for review before approving the PIP.
The Regional Office, in consultation with the Central Office, will review the PIP submitted by a State and provide approval in writing (or electronically) to the State. A PIP will be approved if it meets the guidelines, as specified in 45 CFR 1355.35(a).
In the event that the Children’s Bureau Regional Office and the State cannot reach consensus regarding the content of the PIP or the degree to which program or data improvements are to be achieved, the Children’s Bureau retains the authority to assign the contents of the plan and/or the degree of improvement required for successful completion of the plan. Under such circumstances, the Regional Office will provide to the State a written (or electronic) rationale for the content and degree of improvement.
Once
the PIP is approved, the Children’s Bureau Regional Office will
submit a copy of the final approved PIP to the Children’s
Bureau Central Office and to the following contractors:
The Child Welfare Reviews Project
c/o JBS International, Inc.
5515 Security Lane, Suite 800
North Bethesda, MD 20852-5007
E-mail address: [email protected]
Child
Welfare Information Gateway
Children’s Bureau/ACYF
1250
Maryland Avenue, SW
Eighth Floor
Washington, DC 20024
E-mail: [email protected]
PIP Monitoring and Evaluation
The Children’s Bureau Regional Office, in collaboration with the State, will evaluate the State’s achievements in relation to the terms and conditions of the approved PIP as follows:
The Regional Office will monitor the State’s progress in completing the provisions of the PIP by reviewing the written (or electronic) status reports on the PIP that the State must submit to the Regional Office no less frequently than quarterly, unless the Regional Office approves less frequent reporting (45 CFR 1355.35(d)(4)).
The quarterly status reports should include the following information: (1) a description of progress made during the reporting period and (2) data about measurable factors and their relationship to the established benchmarks and timeframes. (States are strongly encouraged to use the PIP Matrix that appears in this document to prepare the quarterly status reports.)
At least annually, the Regional Office and the State must jointly evaluate the State’s progress in implementing the PIP. This activity should occur in conjunction with the preparation of the State’s APSR, and in collaboration with the Children’s Bureau’s CFSR Unit. The evaluation should focus on the measures and methods of evaluation specified in the PIP.
Action steps and goals included in the PIP will be evaluated for completion according to the approved PIP specifications. The Regional Office and State may jointly determine on the basis of sufficient information that the action steps have been completed and/or the goals achieved before the projected completion dates. When that occurs, no further reporting will be required for the action steps or pertinent outcome or systemic factor goals during the PIP implementation process.
Penalties are suspended while a State is implementing a PIP. If the Children’s Bureau Regional Office determines, however, that the State failed to submit status reports, or that the State is not making satisfactory progress toward completing the action steps or achieving the goals in a timely manner, then the suspension of penalties will cease and withholding will begin (45 CFR 1355.36(e)(2)(i) and (ii)).
II. Strategies for Developing the PIP
A successful PIP requires thoughtful planning and implementation and a process for continually assessing the associated outcomes. Below are suggested ways in which States and Children’s Bureau Regional Offices can work together effectively to achieve the objectives of the program improvement planning phase of the CFSRs in the following areas: (1) Children’s Bureau Support to the States, (2) PIP Planning, (3) Managing Change, (4) Collaborating During the PIP, (5) Measuring Improvements, and (6) Using a Quality Assurance (QA) Approach.
Children’s Bureau Support to the States
The Children’s Bureau Regional Office will provide support to States in designing a PIP through the following:
Facilitating discussions with the State regarding their PIP experiences once a PIP is completed.
Assisting the State in linking their previous PIP to the current Statewide Assessment process, and using that assessment process to begin planning for the next PIP.
Participating in preliminary planning meetings with the State to discuss the Final Report, and assisting the State in exploring effective program improvement strategies.
Participating, as appropriate, in ongoing PIP strategy discussions through written correspondence, conference calls, and onsite visits when possible.
Negotiating levels of improvement and providing guidance about acceptable indicators (measures) of improvement.
Linking the State to needed TA during the PIP development and implementation process.
Providing insights from, and guidance about, other States’ experiences with the PIP development and implementation process, and facilitating links to representatives of other States who have developed a PIP.
Reviewing and commenting on early drafts of the PIP.
Coordinating Federal staff review and approval of the PIP.
An effective State PIP planning process is critical for engaging the appropriate stakeholders, for designing effective strategies and measures, for managing change, and for ensuring positive PIP outcomes. States can use the following strategies when planning a PIP:
Setting the Stage for an Effective PIP Process
Begin the PIP development process while completing the Statewide Assessment. This will allow the State to identify issues and potential underlying causes, with the support of the State review team members and external partners, and to begin exploring strategies for making improvements.
Ensure the engagement of the State and agency’s leadership/upper management throughout the PIP implementation and monitoring process.
Create a process for making program improvements in a manner that leads to positive outcomes and adequate functioning of the systemic factors statewide, and not just in the three local sites selected for the onsite review.
Establish a plan for maintaining ongoing communication with the Children’s Bureau Regional Office staff and other members of the State review team during PIP development, implementation, and evaluation.
Use the PIP development process to enhance the State’s QA process so that new gains achieved through the PIP are sustained over time and the State operates in a continuous improvement environment.
Incorporate the PIP development process into the State’s collaborative planning process for developing the 5-year CFSP and the APSR by involving members of the CFSP planning group and linking improvements to the goals and strategies outlined in the CFSP.
Analyzing the CFSR Results
Develop a plan for distributing information from the CFSR Final Report to facilitate a clear understanding of the findings and to encourage input on the PIP, using strategies such as the following:
Share key information with elected officials through briefings, with providers through focus groups, and with community members through public forums. (See the Children’s Bureau document Engaging State Legislators in the Federal CFSRs: An Information-Sharing Tool for Child Welfare Agency Administrators, available on the Children’s Bureau Web site at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/cwmonitoring/index.htm#cfsr.)
Host a press conference (and/or prepare and distribute press releases) to explain the review findings to the media, and designate a person or unit to respond appropriately to questions about the findings.
Place the Final Report or information about the results of the review on the State agency’s Web site.
Develop or strengthen partnerships with existing organizations or appointed task forces or councils that have goals similar to those outlined in the PIP (for example, join forces with a Governor’s council on Hispanic affairs to recruit Hispanic foster families).
Ensure that the data used by the State provide accurate representations of practice in the State and will provide valid measures of progress in implementing the PIP and the effectiveness of its provisions.
Analyze each area needing improvement and key concerns to identify underlying issues that affect the State’s performance, for example, how training for staff affects their ability to engage parents in the case-planning process.
Identify cross-cutting themes and issues that affect multiple areas of the State’s performance, for example, the effects of inadequate comprehensive assessments on safety, permanency, and well-being outcomes.
Designing the PIP
Consider using a primary strategy approach to integrate the action steps across items, outcomes, and systemic factors.
Be concise and to the point; long documents become unmanageable over time and are not useful in engaging others in child welfare reform. More important, a good PIP should be designed so that a range of staff can use the document to learn about the improvements to be made; some States have designed executive summaries or other condensed versions of their PIPs for use in educating the media, policymakers, and elected officials.
Consider using one writer to finalize the PIP, especially if various members of the State team, including external partners, drafted different sections or components.
Identify the individuals responsible for the program improvement action steps and measurement/review processes, thereby showing staff and stakeholder engagement.
Identify the communities, jurisdictions, or regions that might particularly benefit from program improvement activities for each outcome or systemic factor.
Identify strengths or promising practices that can be used to develop strategies for making improvements. For example, an initiative or project that leads to improved case planning in one area of the State might be expanded to other jurisdictions.
Provide ample time for each goal (and the associated action steps) in the PIP, particularly those that require complex strategies for achieving improvement.
Provide drafts of the PIP (or sections) to the Children’s Bureau Regional Office or members of the State’s review team with a request for feedback that will enable the State to make adjustments, as necessary, early in the PIP development process.
States should consider the following strategies when planning to manage the organizational changes associated with the PIP or any child welfare reform process:
Help all involved parties to view the PIP process as one designed to create lasting and systemic statewide change while also addressing immediate needs. State child welfare administrators should explore openly with their colleagues the effects of change on organizations and individuals.
Recognize that individuals react differently to change. Some people prefer to work in environments or on tasks that are routine and require little change; others enjoy juggling multiple tasks and shifting priorities. State agencies should make an effort to accommodate both styles during the PIP process.
Develop strategies for helping staff to deal with the unanticipated or negative outcomes of change and to leverage the positive opportunities associated with the PIP. Honestly answer staff questions about the possible negative consequences of change; staff often fear the worst, such as losing their job or a program they care about.
Meet regularly with staff during times of change; keeping the lines of communication open during the PIP process is critical.
Consider bringing in outside trainers or facilitators to help staff make the most of the opportunities presented by the PIP. They can help people understand their own fear of change and how to deal with it.
Use the PIP planning process to ensure that the changes that take place are planned for and productive. This is more likely to happen if the PIP is truly integrated into other agency reform efforts.
Develop a PIP that is understandable to the staff in the field who will implement it so that they can help the agency manage the change process.
See attachment B, “Elements of an Effective PIP Process” for additional information about designing a PIP.
Collaborating During the PIP
States can enhance the process of engaging their external partners in the PIP process through the following:
Build on the collaborative partnerships established through the previous CFSR and PIP and the State’s CFSP planning process. Engage partners with positive CFSR- and PIP-related experiences in the State’s effort to collaborate with other stakeholders.
Engage those representatives who participated in preparing the most recent Statewide Assessment and conducting the onsite review (as well as others, as appropriate) in the process of developing the PIP. The State agency might consider designating subgroups of this team to formulate strategies for addressing outcomes and systemic factors that were found not to be in conformity or to prepare different sections of the PIP.
Conduct targeted outreach to stakeholders (individuals or agencies) through the appropriate channels. If a State child welfare administrator needs the cooperation of the director of the State mental health agency, for example, they might jointly work through the head of the human services agency that manages both the child welfare and mental health services agencies. That person can help facilitate the mental health administrator’s involvement by authorizing the time and resources necessary for them to collaborate.
Review with each stakeholder the advantages of the CFSR and PIP collaboration, and jointly identify what has worked well, barriers to previous collaborations, and strategies for overcoming those during the CFSR and PIP processes.
Jointly assess the contributions, time commitment, and resources that each stakeholder might bring to the process.
Jointly establish the “rules of engagement.” This means letting people know how the State plans to operate during the CFSR and PIP processes, inviting their feedback on that process, and setting an equitable workload-sharing system.
Set timelines for all PIP-related meetings, activities, and products, and communicate those to stakeholders.
Solicit the input of agency staff, child welfare service providers, professionals in related fields, and community members on potential strategies for making systemic improvements.
Schedule a meeting with staff from the three sites that participated in the onsite review component of the CFSR, and solicit input about how to make improvements.
Develop a list of questions that might be used during focus groups or other consultation activities with agency staff and external partners during the PIP planning process.
Consider approaches for engaging other key players in developing key sections of the PIP, especially when their work affects the child welfare agency’s efforts to protect and support children (for example, the courts or other State agencies with overlapping service populations). This is particularly helpful in ensuring support for changes that may need to be implemented by those outside the child welfare agency.
For additional information and guidance on collaborating during the CFSRs, see appendix J, “Collaborating During the CFSRs,” in the CFSR Procedures Manual, available on the Children’s Bureau Web site at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/cwmonitoring/tools_guide/procedures/appendixj.htm
Measuring Improvements
States should consider the following when developing PIP measurement processes:
What are we trying to measure (the improvement to be made)?
What measurement processes worked well during the previous PIP, and what systems do we currently have in place for measuring improvements of this type or in this area? Can any of those be used or adapted for the current PIP?
If we do not have existing measures for a specific PIP strategy, what types of measures does the research or our experience suggest will work best for assessing this type of improvement?
If no measures exist, who should be included in the discussion about the development of a new measurement strategy?
Who will be involved in the action leading to the improvement, and whom might we team with to monitor the measures of improvement?
Are there data resources, such as those from the Court Improvement Program (CIP) projects, that might provide alternate or parallel methods of measuring performance in certain areas?
Using a QA Approach
If States choose to adopt a qualitative review or QA process similar to the CFSRs to evaluate progress through the PIP, they must specify in the PIP exactly how that process will be used to evaluate performance and determine whether benchmarks and goals are being achieved. They should provide information about (1) the type of system and instrument to be used, (2) how often and where it will be used, by whom, and the sample size, and (3) how the QA system relates to the CFSRs.
States should consider the following when assessing whether the proposed QA system will enable the Children’s Bureau and the State to monitor PIP progress:
Does the PIP include a general description of the QA system, including how the State will manage it, who will oversee it, and what type of instrument(s) will be used?
When,
where, and at what intervals will the reviews be conducted?
Who will conduct the reviews, and what type of training or experience is required for this role?
How many cases will comprise the reviews, and how will they be selected?
How do the State’s review procedures and criteria relate to the CFSR?
What level of improvement, as evidenced by the case reviews, will establish that the State has met its PIP goal(s)?
Is a sustainability period associated with establishing that the State has met its goal(s)? (For example, to ensure that improvements are sustained over time, a State might designate that the desired percentage of improvements must be achieved and maintained for two quarters.)
How will the review results be reported and used?
If the State plans to use the results of the CFSR as baselines from which to measure progress in the PIP, is there sufficient similarity in the State’s review process and the CFSR to ensure that the results can be compared?
If the State is using results other than those from the CFSR to set the baselines for measuring progress, is that information already available or does it need to be collected to be a part of the PIP process?
How will the timing of the State’s reviews relate to the timing of the improvements the State is implementing? For example, will the State’s reviews reflect the work that the State has already done to make programmatic improvements?
The Children’s Bureau Regional Office staff also will consider how the State’s largest metropolitan area is being reviewed through the State’s QA system, because decisions about a State’s PIP performance cannot be made without examining the impact on the largest metropolitan area. This does not mean that the State must review the largest metropolitan area every quarter; rather the Children’s Bureau staff should work with States to ensure that their QA review results include the largest metropolitan area.
III. TA With the PIP
TA is available to States during all stages of the CFSRs, including PIP development and implementation. States should assess their TA needs for developing and implementing the PIP before the start of the Statewide Assessment and continuing through the PIP process. The Children’s Bureau funds a network of National Resource Centers (NRCs) that provide TA related to the CFSRs. The NRCs can provide TA to the States during the PIP development and implementation process. (See the Children’s Bureau Web site at www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/tta/index.htm for more information on the NRCs).
States should work with their Children’s Bureau Regional Office, which is responsible for the coordination of TA to States during the CFSRs, to determine the most appropriate TA source on the basis of their identified TA needs. States also are encouraged to seek assistance from sources that will promote stronger relationships between the agency and community-based assistance providers (such as local universities) and build statewide capacity in the areas of child welfare and protection.
State TA activities are typically most successful when States involve the Children’s Bureau Regional Office and TA providers early in their Statewide Assessment and PIP planning process. States can use the following questions when determining their TA needs:
Which TA provider can best support the State in the areas identified as requiring program improvements?
How will the State integrate the TA we are planning to receive, and are the TA approaches being planned compatible?
When will the different TA events be scheduled to take place?
The Children’s Bureau has developed a standard format that States are encouraged to use in preparing the PIP for submission to the Children’s Bureau Regional Office. (For updated information regarding the PIP format, see attachment F, “Child and Family Services Review Technical Bulletin #4.”) The standard format begins immediately following these instructions. States are encouraged to use this format to facilitate ease of review, approval, and tracking of State PIPs. States choosing to use a different format for preparing the PIP must include all of the information required by regulation at 45 CFR 1355.35.
The PIP standard format contains the following sections:
PIP General Information
States should provide general contact information for State agency personnel responsible for the CFSR (and for PIP development and monitoring, if different).
PIP Strategy Summary and TA Plan
States should develop a PIP Strategy Summary and TA Plan in preparing their PIP. The summary lists the State’s primary strategies for addressing the key concerns from the review to be addressed during the PIP implementation period, and the TA resources needed to carry out the provisions of the strategies for the PIP.
States are strongly encouraged to use the PIP Matrix to develop their PIP; the Children’s Bureau Regional Office then will use the matrix to track PIP progress. States also are encouraged to use the PIP Matrix to submit quarterly reports on PIP progress by noting the dates of achievement of goals, action steps, and benchmarks, and evidence of completion. When goals, action steps, and benchmarks are not met, States can provide a narrative explanation at the end of the PIP Matrix. The matrix may also serve to document renegotiated timeframes or action steps. States should submit the PIP Strategy Summary and TA Plan and PIP Matrix to the Children’s Bureau Regional Office for approval.
PIP Agreement Form (approvals and signatures)
The Chief Executive Officer of a State child welfare agency and the Children’s Bureau Regional Office responsible for the State must approve the PIP.
For more information on the PIP development and implementation process, States should contact the lead Children’s Bureau Regional Office staff member for the State’s review.
OMB Control No: 0970-0214; Expiration date: 1/31/2010 Attachment A Children’s Bureau Child and Family Services Reviews Program Improvement PlanSuggested Standard Format |
|||||||||||||||||||||
States
are encouraged to use this PIP standard format to submit their
PIP to the Children’s Bureau Regional Office. The standard
format includes the following sections:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
I. PIP General Information |
|||||||||||||||||||||
CB Region: |
I |
|
II |
|
III |
|
IV |
|
V |
|
VI |
|
VII |
|
VIII |
|
IX |
|
X |
|
|
State: |
|||||||||||||||||||||
Lead Children’s Bureau Regional Office Contact Person:
|
Telephone Number: |
||||||||||||||||||||
E-mail Address: |
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
State Agency Name: |
Address: |
||||||||||||||||||||
Telephone Number: |
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Lead State Agency Contact Person for the CFSR:
|
Telephone Number: |
||||||||||||||||||||
E-mail Address: |
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Lead State Agency PIP Contact Person (if different): |
Telephone Number: |
||||||||||||||||||||
E-mail Address: |
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Lead State Agency Data Contact Person: |
Telephone Number: |
||||||||||||||||||||
E-mail Address: |
|||||||||||||||||||||
State PIP Team Members* (name, title, organization) |
|||||||||||||||||||||
1. |
|||||||||||||||||||||
2. |
|||||||||||||||||||||
3. |
|||||||||||||||||||||
THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT OF 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13)
Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 240 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and reviewing the collection of information.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
State PIP Team Members* (name, title, organization) (continued) |
4. |
5. |
6. |
7. |
8. |
9. |
10. |
11. |
12. |
13. |
14. |
15. |
16. |
17. |
18. |
19. |
20. |
21. |
22. |
23. |
24. |
25. |
26. |
27. |
28. |
29. |
30. |
31. |
32. |
33. |
34. |
35. |
36. |
37. |
38. |
39. |
40. |
41. |
42. |
*List key individuals who are actually working on the PIP and not necessarily everyone who was consulted during the PIP development process.
PIP Strategy Summary and TA Plan, Matrix Instructions, and Quality Assurance Checklist
PIP Strategy Summary and TA Plan Instructions
States are strongly encouraged to develop a PIP Strategy Summary and TA Plan, using the format that appears on the next page. Using this format helps to both provide a focus on overarching reforms and simplify the PIP document. The PIP Strategy Summary and TA Plan comprises three elements:
Primary Strategies: In this section of the PIP Strategy Summary and TA Plan, the State summarizes the broad strategy approaches that address the key concerns from the review and serve as a framework for goals/negotiated measures, benchmarks, and action steps. These approaches include the overarching reforms and continuing strategies that build on prior program improvement plan activity. The primary strategies should reflect integration with the timeframes of other plans, such as the CFSP. Primary strategies should be assigned unique numbers to allow cross-walking to action steps and benchmarks.
Key Concerns: In this section, the State summarizes the key concerns that will be addressed over the course of the PIP implementation period. These key concerns should be consistent with those identified through the CFSR and included in the Final Report.
TA Resources Needed: In this section, the State identifies the TA resources needed to carry out the provisions of the strategies for each year of the PIP. The source, frequency, and duration of the TA should be summarized, including both Federal and non-Federal sources.
See attachment C for a sample PIP Strategy Summary and TA Plan.
.
State:
Date Submitted:
Primary Strategies |
Key Concerns |
TA Resources Needed |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
States are strongly encouraged to use the PIP Matrix form for both PIP submissions and PIP quarterly reports. A sample completed section of a PIP Matrix appears in attachment D. The matrix is designed to allow States to enter information by themes or broad strategy areas or approaches, under which each of the items out of conformity is addressed. Using a theme or broad strategy approach helps to both provide a focus on overarching reforms and simplify the PIP document.
The following are instructions for completing the PIP Matrix:
Introductory information: At the top of the PIP Matrix, States should enter the information requested to identify their State, the type of report being submitted (PIP or quarterly report), and the date submitted.
Part A: Strategy Measurement Plan and Quarterly Status Report: This section of the PIP Matrix is designed to allow States to detail action steps that address the goals/negotiated measures and benchmarks. It also allows States to report quarterly progress on each action step.
States will need to copy the table framework for part A as many times as appropriate to the number of strategies and action steps contained in their PIP such that all of the outcome items, data composite indicators, and systemic factor items that contributed to nonconformity are addressed.
States should complete the shaded cells in the matrix only when using the matrix for quarterly reporting or reporting the results of renegotiation.
The following is information about each cell in part A:
Primary Strategy: States should note each broad strategy approach that addresses the key concerns from the review and serves as a framework for the goals/negotiated measures, action steps, and benchmarks. These include the overarching reforms and continuing strategies that build on prior PIP activity. The primary strategies should reflect integration with other plans such as the CFSP.
Goal: States should describe the overall accomplishment that is to be achieved through the primary strategy that addresses applicable areas requiring improvement based on the Final Report.
Applicable CFSR Outcomes or Systemic Factors: States should identify the outcomes or systemic factors being addressed through the primary strategy and action steps.
Applicable CFSR Items: States should indicate the specific item(s) addressed based on items requiring improvement in the Final Report.
Action Steps and Benchmarks: States should provide a brief description of each action step that will be undertaken to create improvements under each goal. Benchmarks in this section can be qualitative processes and/or incremental quantitative measures of progress toward achieving the action step. States should list as many benchmarks as appropriate for adequate monitoring of progress for each action step. Action steps and benchmarks should be numbered according to the primary strategy that they are associated with.
Person Responsible: States should identify the individual(s) responsible for the action steps and benchmarks, clarifying staff and stakeholder engagement and responsibility.
Evidence of Completion: States should detail the specific documents or reports that will be used to provide the Children’s Bureau Regional Office with evidence of progress and eventual completion of the action step.
Quarter Due: States should provide the quarter in which each action step or benchmark will be completed.
Quarter Completed: The Children’s Bureau Regional Office will determine, based on review of State reports, the quarter in which each action step or benchmark is completed.
Quarterly Update: States should enter and report information regarding each action step or benchmark that is due during the quarter.
Renegotiated Action Steps and Benchmarks: If applicable, States should note whether the action step and benchmarks were renegotiated and provide a detailed description.
Part B: National Standards Measurement Plan and Quarterly Status Report: This section of the PIP Matrix is designed to allow States to enter and report information regarding each national standard data indicator that is to be addressed in their PIP, including (1) their performance as measured in the Final Report, and the source data period for the data indicator; (2) the performance as measured for the baseline established, and the source data period for the data indicator; (3) the negotiated improvement goal; and (4) the renegotiated improvement goal, if applicable. When using the PIP Matrix for quarterly reporting, they also should enter the status of the data indicator for each reported quarter.
Part C: Item-Specific and Quantitative Measurement Plan and Quarterly Status Report: This section of the PIP Matrix is designed to allow States to enter and report information regarding each CFSR item or action step with quantitative measurement that is to be addressed in their PIP, including (1) the status of the item in the Final Report; (2) the performance as measured for the baseline established and the source data period for the measure; (3) the negotiated improvement goal; (4) the method of measuring improvement; and (5) the renegotiated improvement goal, if applicable. When using the PIP Matrix for quarterly reporting, they also should enter the status of the item or action step for each reported quarter. States will need to copy the table framework for part C as many times as appropriate to the number of items contained in their PIP.
States should submit the PIP Strategy Summary and TA Plan and the PIP Matrix to the Children’s Bureau Regional Office staff person responsible for the State’s CFSR.
C. PIP Quality Assurance Checklist
State child welfare agency staff and their external partners may use the following quality assurance checklist to review the State’s PIP to determine whether it meets the requirements necessary to contribute to a successful PIP process that will result in improvements to child welfare practice:
___ Did the State negotiate with the Children’s Bureau Regional Office the level of improvement to be achieved for each outcome and systemic factor determined not to be in substantial conformity, including a percentage of improvement for statewide data indicators that did not meet the national standards?
___ Does the plan contain action steps for each goal that build on strengths identified in the Summary of Findings (Final Report on the CFSR)?
___ Does the plan identify the person(s) responsible for overseeing the development, implementation, and oversight of each action step for achieving the goals?
___ Does the plan contain realistic timeframes for implementing the action steps and achieving the goals?
___ Have the goals been
prioritized to ensure that action steps for achieving the most
important goals (for example, those related to safety) are
implemented first and within the timeframes outlined in the PIP
instructions?
___ Does the plan explain how
action steps targeted to one jurisdiction will lead to positive
outcomes and adequate systemic functioning statewide?
___ Does the plan include benchmarks for measuring the progress of improvements towards goal achievement?
___ Are those benchmarks consistent with the level of effort required to improve performance and achieve PIP goals?
___ Does the plan include the State’s method for evaluating the progress being made toward the goals and action steps?
III. PIP Agreement Form
The PIP should be signed and dated by the Chief Executive Officer of the State child welfare agency and by the Children’s Bureau Regional Office responsible for the State. The approved PIP with original signature must be retained in the Children’s Bureau Regional Office. A hard copy of the approved PIP must be submitted to the following parties immediately upon approval:
State child welfare agency
Children’s Bureau (Child
and Family Services Review staff)
Child Welfare Review Project,
c/o JBS International, Inc.
Agreements
The following Federal and State officials agree to the content and terms of the attached Program Improvement Plan:
|
|
Name of State Executive Officer for Child Welfare Services |
Date |
|
|
Children’s Bureau |
Date |
Amendments
This section should be completed only in the event of renegotiations regarding the content of the PIP, pursuant to 45 CFR 1355.35(e)(4). The specific renegotiated content should be inserted in the PIP Matrix under the appropriate section being replaced or modified. A summary by the action step, benchmark or improvement goal can be listed below. Copies of approved, renegotiated PIPs should be retained and distributed as noted above immediately upon completion of the renegotiation process.
The renegotiated content of the attached PIP, as summarized below, has been approved by State personnel and the Children’s Bureau Regional Office with authority to negotiate such content and is approved by Federal and State officials:
Renegotiated Action Steps, Benchmarks, or Improvement Goals
|
Date Renegotiated |
Approval of State Executive Officer for Child Welfare Services
|
Approval Children’s Bureau |
||
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
Part A: Strategy Measurement Plan and Quarterly Status Report
Primary Strategy:
|
Applicable CFSR Outcomes or Systemic Factors: |
||||
Goal:
|
Applicable CFSR Items: |
||||
Action Steps and Benchmarks
|
Person Responsible |
Evidence of Completion |
Quarter Due |
Quarter Completed |
Quarterly Update |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Renegotiated Action Steps and Benchmarks
|
|
|
|
|
|
Part B: National Standards Measurement Plan and Quarterly Status Report
Safety Outcome 1: Absence of Recurrence of Maltreatment |
||||||||||||
National Standard |
94.6% |
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured in Final Report/Source Data Period |
|
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured at Baseline/Source Data Period |
|
|||||||||||
Negotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Renegotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Status (Enter the current quarter measurement for the reported quarter.) |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
Q4 |
Q5 |
Q6 |
Q7 |
Q8 |
Q9 |
Q10 |
Q11 |
Q12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Safety Outcome 1: Absence of Maltreatment of Children in Foster Care |
||||||||||||
National Standard |
99.68% |
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured in Final Report/Source Data Period |
|
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured at Baseline/Source Data Period |
|
|||||||||||
Negotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Renegotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Status (Enter the current quarter measurement for the reported quarter.) |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
Q4 |
Q5 |
Q6 |
Q7 |
Q8 |
Q9 |
Q10 |
Q11 |
Q12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Permanency Outcome 1: Timeliness and Permanency of Reunification |
||||||||||||
National Standard |
122.6 |
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured in Final Report/Source Data Period |
|
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured at Baseline/Source Data Period |
|
|||||||||||
Negotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Renegotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Status (Enter the current quarter measurement for the reported quarter.) |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
Q4 |
Q5 |
Q6 |
Q7 |
Q8 |
Q9 |
Q10 |
Q11 |
Q12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Permanency Outcome 1: Timeliness of Adoptions |
||||||||||||
National Standard |
106.4 |
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured in Final Report/Source Data Period |
|
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured at Baseline/Source Data Period |
|
|||||||||||
Negotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Renegotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Status (Enter the current quarter measurement for the reported quarter.) |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
Q4 |
Q5 |
Q6 |
Q7 |
Q8 |
Q9 |
Q10 |
Q11 |
Q12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Permanency Outcome 1: Achieving Permanency for Children in Foster Care for Long Periods of Time |
||||||||||||
National Standard |
121.7 |
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured in Final Report/Source Data Period |
|
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured at Baseline/Source Data Period |
|
|||||||||||
Negotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Renegotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Status (Enter the current quarter measurement for the reported quarter.) |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
Q4 |
Q5 |
Q6 |
Q7 |
Q8 |
Q9 |
Q10 |
Q11 |
Q12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Permanency Outcome 1: Placement Stability |
||||||||||||
National Standard |
101.5 |
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured in Final Report/Source Data Period |
|
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured at Baseline/Source Data Period |
|
|||||||||||
Negotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Renegotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Status (Enter the current quarter measurement for the reported quarter.) |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
Q4 |
Q5 |
Q6 |
Q7 |
Q8 |
Q9 |
Q10 |
Q11 |
Q12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Part C: Item-Specific and Quantitative Measurement Plan and Quarterly Status Report
Outcome/Systemic Factor: ____ Item: ____ |
||||||||||||
Performance as Measured in Final Report |
|
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured at Baseline/Source Data Period |
|
|||||||||||
Negotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Method of Measuring Improvement |
|
|||||||||||
Renegotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Status (Enter the current quarter measurement for the reported quarter.) |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
Q4 |
Q5 |
Q6 |
Q7 |
Q8 |
Q9 |
Q10 |
Q11 |
Q12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outcome/Systemic Factor: ____ Item: ____ |
||||||||||||
Performance as Measured in Final Report |
|
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured at Baseline/Source Data Period |
|
|||||||||||
Negotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Method of Measuring Improvement |
|
|||||||||||
Renegotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Status (Enter the current quarter measurement for the reported quarter.) |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
Q4 |
Q5 |
Q6 |
Q7 |
Q8 |
Q9 |
Q10 |
Q11 |
Q12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outcome/Systemic Factor: ____ Item: ____ |
||||||||||||
Performance as Measured in Final Report |
|
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured at Baseline/Source Data Period |
|
|||||||||||
Negotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Method of Measuring Improvement |
|
|||||||||||
Renegotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Status (Enter the current quarter measurement for the reported quarter.) |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
Q4 |
Q5 |
Q6 |
Q7 |
Q8 |
Q9 |
Q10 |
Q11 |
Q12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outcome/Systemic Factor: ____ Item: ____ |
||||||||||||
Performance as Measured in Final Report |
|
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured at Baseline/Source Data Period |
|
|||||||||||
Negotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Method of Measuring Improvement |
|
|||||||||||
Renegotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Status (Enter the current quarter measurement for the reported quarter.) |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
Q4 |
Q5 |
Q6 |
Q7 |
Q8 |
Q9 |
Q10 |
Q11 |
Q12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outcome/Systemic Factor: ____ Item: ____ |
||||||||||||
Performance as Measured in Final Report |
|
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured at Baseline/Source Data Period |
|
|||||||||||
Negotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Method of Measuring Improvement |
|
|||||||||||
Renegotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Status (Enter the current quarter measurement for the reported quarter.) |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
Q4 |
Q5 |
Q6 |
Q7 |
Q8 |
Q9 |
Q10 |
Q11 |
Q12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outcome/Systemic Factor: ____ Item: ____ |
||||||||||||
Performance as Measured in Final Report |
|
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured at Baseline/Source Data Period |
|
|||||||||||
Negotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Method of Measuring Improvement |
|
|||||||||||
Renegotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Status (Enter the current quarter measurement for the reported quarter.) |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
Q4 |
Q5 |
Q6 |
Q7 |
Q8 |
Q9 |
Q10 |
Q11 |
Q12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Attachment B Elements of an Effective PIP Process
|
The Children’s Bureau Central and Regional Office staff administer the CFSRs. The reviews comprise two phases: (1) a Statewide Assessment and (2) an onsite review. The reviews assess State child welfare agency performance on seven outcomes and seven systemic factors. States found out of conformity with any of those outcomes or systemic factors are required to develop a PIP to address those. |
While the CFSR process provides States flexibility in designing their PIP, the Children’s Bureau Central and Regional Office staff encourage States to develop a system for designing, implementing, and managing the PIP, including engaging external partners and stakeholders in the process. Regional Office staff should help States to consider the following elements of an effective PIP planning and implementation process when designing their PIP process and document: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The team also will approve major PIP strategies, provide the authority and support necessary to enable the core PIP Development Team (see below) to design and implement the PIP, and provide support to supervisors and others in implementing key PIP action steps and measuring their effectiveness. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Attachment C
Sample PIP Strategy Summary and TA Plan
State: Anystate
Date Submitted: September 30, 2008
Primary Strategies |
Key Concerns |
TA Resources Needed |
|
|
National Child Welfare Resource Center for Organizational Improvement (NRCOI)
NRC for Family-Centered Practice and Permanency Planning (NRCFCP) |
|
|
NRC for Organizational Improvement
NRC for Child Welfare Data and Technology |
|
|
NRC on Legal and Judicial Issues |
Attachment D
Sample Completed Section of a PIP Matrix
Below is a sample section of a completed PIP Matrix, which is designed to assist States in completing their own PIP Matrix. Inclusion of specific primary strategies, goals, or action steps in this sample are for purposes of illustrating how to use the PIP Matrix only and should not be construed as an endorsement of those strategies, goals, or action steps.
IV. PIP Matrix
State: Anystate
Type of Report: PIP: __ Quarterly Report: (Quarter: 4)
Date Submitted: September 30, 2008
Part A: Strategy Measurement Plan and Quarterly Status Report
Primary Strategy: 1. Implement Systems of Care practice approach
|
Applicable CFSR Outcomes or Systemic Factors: Safety Outcome 2 Child and Family Well-Being Outcome 1 Staff and Provider Training Service Array and Resource Development |
|||||
Goal: Enhance infrastructure that builds on partnerships based on interagency collaboration, individualized, strength-based care, cultural competence, and community-based services to meet the multiple needs of children and families |
Applicable CFSR Items: 4, 17, 18, 32, 33, 35, 36, 37 |
|||||
Action Steps and Benchmarks
1.1. Develop work plan for implementing System of Care (SOC) approach statewide, including assessment of available service array, with assistance from NRCOI and NRCFCP
1.1(A). Hold meetings with agency leadership, court leadership, and NRCs for kickoff of SOC implementation
1.1(B). Convene work group comprising families that receive services, front-line child welfare staff, and other key partners to guide development of the plan |
Person Responsible
M. Jordan |
Evidence of Completion
Copy of work plan produced
Summary of meetings held and lists of attendees
Copy of meeting minutes and list of work group participants |
Quarter Due
Q2
Q1
Q2 |
Quarter Completed
Q2
Q1
Q2 |
Quarterly Update
Q2 - Final work plan reviewed by NRCOI and NRCFCP. Plan distributed statewide under cover of agency director. Copy of plan attached with Q2 quarterly report.
Q1- Kickoff meetings held. Copy of summary and lists of attendees attached with Q1 quarterly report.
Q2 - Three meetings of the work group held. Copies of meeting minutes and list of participants attached with Q2 quarterly report. |
|
Action Steps and Benchmarks
1.1(C). Conduct complete assessment of community- based service array.
|
Person Responsible
M. Jordan
|
Evidence of Completion
Copy of assessment report, with needed services identified by county |
Quarter Due
Q2
. |
Quarter Completed
Q2 |
Quarterly Update
Q2 - Assessment completed and report prepared. Copy of assessment report attached with Q2 quarterly report. |
|
1.2. Provide training to all caseworkers, foster parents, kinship providers, supervisors, and interagency partners on SOC guiding principles.
1.2(A). Revise and implement core caseworker curriculum to provide focus on individualized strengths- based, culturally competent practice |
I. Thomas
|
Identified in benchmarks below
Copy of revised core curriculum and summary of implemen-tation |
Q5
Q4
|
Q4 |
Q4 - Trainings in final two regions completed in this reporting period; two trainings for new caseworkers also completed. Copy of curriculum, summary report, and training attendance lists attached with this quarterly report.
|
|
Action Steps and Benchmarks
1.2(B). Revise and implement foster parent core curriculum to provide focus on individualized strengths-based, culturally competent practice
1.2(C). Revise and implement supervisor curriculum to provide focus on individualized strengths- based, culturally competent practice
|
Person Responsible
I. Thomas
|
Evidence of Completion
Copy of revised core curriculum and summary of implemen-tation
Copy of revised supervisor curriculum and summary of implemen-tation |
Quarter Due
Q3
Q4
|
Quarter Completed
Q3
Q4 |
Quarterly Update
Q3 - Trainings for foster parents completed. Copy of curriculum, summary report, and training attendance lists attached with Q3 quarterly report.
Q4 - Trainings in final region completed in this reporting period. Copy of curriculum, summary report, and training attendance lists attached with this quarterly report.
|
|
1.3. Develop and implement team decisionmaking
|
O. Robertson |
Copy of State case record review results on implemen-tation of team decision-making |
Q5
|
|
|
|
Action Steps and Benchmarks
1.3(A). Revise current departmental policies regarding family involvement in case planning, and incorporate team decisionmaking at critical decision points
1.3(B). Provide training to all caseworkers and supervisors on revised policies regarding child and family involvement in case planning and team decision- making
1.3(C). Conduct case record review on implementation of team decisionmaking
|
Person Responsible
O. Robertson |
Evidence of Completion
Copy of revised and approved departmental policies
Copies of training curriculum and training attendance lists
Copy of State case record review results |
Quarter Due
Q2
Q3
Q5 |
Quarter Completed
Q2
Q3
|
Quarterly Update
Q2 - Departmental work group on case planning and case review met to finalize revised policies on case planning, including use of Family Group Conferencing. In developing the final policies, work group met with community stakeholders, caseworkers and supervisors, and parents and foster parents. New policies approved by Secretary of Health and Human Services. Copy of revised and approved policies attached with Q2 quarterly report.
Q3 - Trainings completed in all regions. Copy of training curriculum and training attendance lists attached with Q3 quarterly report.
|
|
Action Steps and Benchmarks
1.4. Develop MOU on interagency collaboration and SOC with Departments of Juvenile Justice, Administrative Office of the Courts, and Office of Education
1.4(A). Meet with staff representatives from three departments to discuss outlines of MOU.
1.4(B). Develop and obtain comments on draft MOU from designated department staff.
1.4(C). Integrate and reconcile comments; obtain review of final draft from designated department staff.
|
Person Responsible
C. Frazier
|
Evidence of Completion
Copy of MOU
Meeting minutes
Copy of draft with departmental comments
Copy of draft with signoff from three departments |
Quarter Due
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3 |
Quarter Completed
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3 |
Quarterly Update
Q4 - Interagency work group met to address final budget issues related to implementing SOC work plan and added language related to financing into guiding principals and plan. The heads of departments signed the MOU. MOU attached with this quarterly report.
Q1 - Meeting completed. Minutes attached with Q1 quarterly report.
Q2 - Draft developed and circulated; comments integrated. Marked-up draft attached with Q2 quarterly report.
Q3 - Final comments from all three departments integrated into text. Signed draft attached with Q3 quarterly report. |
|
Action Steps and Benchmarks
1.5. Increase use of Child and Family Services Expert Consultants from 16% of cases to 42% of cases managed by caseworkers with fewer than 2 years of experience
1.5(A). Develop and send agencywide announcement regarding availability of Child and Family Services Expert Consultants
1.5(B). Hold conference call with supervisors statewide to review protocol on use of consultants |
Person Responsible
J. Erving |
Evidence of Completion
Monitoring report issued on use of consultants by caseworkers with fewer than 2 years of experience
Copy of announce-ment
Copy of attendance list |
Quarter Due
Q4
Q1
Q3 |
Quarter Completed
Q4
Q1
Q3 |
Quarterly Update
Q4 - Monitoring protocol reviewed by work group and agency administrator, and monitoring task conducted. Per attached monitoring report, rate of use of consultants among the target group of caseworkers stands near 65%. Report attached with this quarterly report.
Q1 - Announcement developed, reviewed by work group and agency administrator, and sent to all staff and contractors. Copy of announcement attached with Q1 quarterly report.
Q3 - Talking points developed and reviewed by administrator. Initial and followup announcements sent to supervisors, and conference call held. Copy of attendance list attached with Q3 quarterly report. |
Renegotiated Action Steps and Benchmarks
1.3. Develop and implement team decisionmaking
|
O. Robertson |
Copy of State case record review results on implemen-tation of team decision-making |
Q8 (prev-iously Q5) |
|
|
2. Strengthen continuous quality assurance (QA) program
|
Applicable CFSR Outcomes or Systemic Factors: Quality Assurance System Agency Responsiveness to the Community |
||||
Goal: Improve quality assurance data collected and strengthen systems for disseminating QA data to field |
Applicable CFSR Items: 30, 31, 38 |
||||
Action Steps and Benchmarks
2.1. Develop outcome measures for all required practice skills, with assistance from NRCCWDT and NRCOI
2.1(A). Develop list of practice skills to which outcome measures can be applied
2.1(B). Draft outcome measures for each measurable practice skill
|
Person Responsible
M. Johnson |
Evidence of Completion
Copy of approved outcome measures issued
Copy of approved list
Copy of list of outcome measures
|
Quarter Due
Q2
Q1
Q1
|
Quarter Completed
Q2
Q1
Q1
|
Quarterly Update
Q2 - See below. Copy of outcome measures attached with Q2 quarterly report.
Q1 - List of measurable practice skills drafted and circulated to unit heads, revisions integrated, and final list approved by agency administrator. Copy of approved list attached with Q1 quarterly report.
Q1 - List of outcome measures drafted and circulated to unit heads, revisions integrated. Copy of list attached with Q1 quarterly report.
|
Action Steps and Benchmarks
2.1(C). Test outcome measures with previous year data/obtain final approval of measures
|
Person Responsible
M. Johnson
|
Evidence of Completion
Copy of outcome measures with approval signoff from agency admini-strator |
Quarter Due
Q2 |
Quarter Completed
Q2 |
Quarterly Update
Q2 - Data unit ran outcome measures for full year of data, refined measures to address minor issues, and circulated to agency administrator, who approved the measures. Copy of outcome measures with agency administrator signoff attached with Q2 quarterly report. |
2.2. Train caseworkers and supervisors on new outcome measures
2.2(A). Develop training curricula for supervisors and for caseworkers
2.2(B).Train supervisors in each region
2.2(C). Train agency caseworkers statewide |
E. Baylor |
Attendance verification
Copy of approved curricula
Copies of attendance lists
Copies of attendance lists |
Q3
Q1
Q2
Q3 |
Q3
Q1
Q2
Q3 |
Q3 - See below; caseworkers and supervisors trained on approved outcome measures Attendance lists attached with Q2 and Q3 quarterly reports.
Q1 - Curricula developed and approved by chief of training unit and other unit heads; new curricula tested through training of sample of supervisors and caseworkers. Copies of curricula attached with Q1 quarterly report.
Q2 - Supervisors in all five regions trained. Attendance lists attached with Q2 quarterly report.
Q3 - Caseworkers in all five regions trained. Attendance lists attached with Q3 quarterly report. |
2.3. Develop and implement survey mechanism for obtaining input from foster parents and parents receiving family preservation services on system performance
2.3(A). Draft survey mechanism
2.3(B). Test survey with sample of foster parents and parents receiving family preservation services/revise survey
2.3(C). Survey disseminated to QA Unit, and QA staff briefed on survey implementation
|
B. Russell
|
Copy of survey mechanism
Copy of draft survey
Copy of revised survey
Copy of memo to QA Unit |
Q3
Q1
Q2
Q3 |
Q3
Q1
Q2
Q3 |
Q3 - See below; copy of survey and evidence of dissemination attached with Q2 and Q3 quarterly reports.
Q1 - Draft survey mechanism developed, circulated to heads of foster care and family preservation units, and revisions integrated. Copy of draft survey mechanism attached with Q1 quarterly report.
Q2 - Survey mechanism tested with sample of foster/family preservation parents, and focus groups held. Survey revised to address issues, and tested with new sample. Copies of revised survey and focus group comments attached with Q2 quarterly report.
Q3 - Survey mechanism disseminated to QA Unit staff statewide. Conference call for all QA staff held to train staff on use of new survey instrument. Copy of memo to QA Unit and attendance list for conference call attached with Q3 quarterly report. |
2.4. Implement mechanism for distributing quarterly QA data to all caseworkers and supervisors statewide, with assistance from NRCCWDT
2.4(A). Meet with NRCCWDT to discuss options.
2.4(B). Develop test version of selected instrument, test with sample of agency supervisors and caseworkers, and collect feedback
2.4(C). Revise instrument to address user comments, and re-test with new sample of supervisors and caseworkers
|
J. West
|
Monitoring report issued on implemen-tation of new system
Summary of TA meeting
Printouts from test version, and copy of user comments
Printouts from revised test version, and copy of any additional comments |
Q4
Q1
Q1
Q2
|
Q4
Q1
Q1
Q2
|
Q4 - See below; Office on Quality Assurance issued monitoring report in this reporting period on the new electronic QA Data Platform. Monitoring report attached with this quarterly report.
Q1 - Meeting held with NRCCWDT, options outlined, and preferred option selected by Office on Quality Assurance and departmental information technology (IT) staff. Summary of meeting attached with Q1 quarterly report.
Q1 - Beta version of QA Data Platform developed and pilot-tested, and user feedback collected. Link to online beta version and copy of user comments attached with Q1 quarterly report.
Q2 - Beta version of platform revised and pilot-tested with second group of agency staff , and minor additional comments collected and used to make minor adjustments to beta version Link to online beta version and copy of additional user comments attached with Q2 quarterly report. |
2.4(D). Make final revisions, launch instrument, and disseminate agencywide announcement |
J. West
|
Copy of announce-ment |
Q3 |
Q3 |
Q3 - QA Data Platform launched and announced to agency staff statewide. Link to platform and copy of dissemination announcement attached with this quarterly report. |
Renegotiated Action Steps and Benchmarks
|
|
|
|
|
|
Primary Strategy: 3. Implement concurrent planning in collaboration with courts
|
Applicable CFSR Outcomes or Systemic Factors: Permanency Outcome 1 Case Review System |
||||
Goal: Improve and expedite permanency for children entering care
|
Applicable CFSR Items: 7, 9, 26, 27, 28, 29 |
||||
Action Steps and Benchmarks
3.1. Convene Steering Committee, including agency and court stakeholders and NCWRCLJI, for 1-day TA event
3.1(A). Schedule and hold 1-day TA event with Steering Committee and NCWRCLJI
3.1(B). Develop summary of TA event identifying key issues |
Person Responsible
J. Havlicek |
Evidence of Completion
Summary of TA event notes and list of participants
Copy of e-mail scheduling TA event
Copy of TA event summary and list of participants
|
Quarter Due
Q2
Q2
Q2
|
Quarter Completed
Q2
Q2
Q2 |
Quarterly Update
Q2 - 1-day TA event held, and summary developed. See below; summary and list of participants attached with Q2 quarterly report.
Q2 - TA event scheduled and held; as part of session, NRC and Committee drafted outline of key priorities in implementing concurrent planning. Copy of scheduling e-mail and outline attached with Q1 quarterly report.
Q2 - Summary drafted and circulated to Steering Committee for comment; comments integrated and summary sent to committee. Summary attached with Q2 quarterly report. |
Action Steps and Benchmarks
3.2. Conduct joint training on concurrent planning for agency management, children’s court judges, foster parents, and caseworkers
3.2(A). Develop curriculum for agency management; adapt to develop curricula appropriate for judges, foster parents, and caseworkers
3.2(B). Test curricula with sample audiences; revise as needed.
3.2(C). Conduct training of agency managers and caseworkers
|
Person Responsible
W. Chamber-lain
|
Evidence of Completion
Copies of curricula and attendance verification
Copies of draft curricula
Copies of test audience comments
Copy of attendance list
|
Quarter Due
Q4
Q2
Q3
Q4
|
Quarter Completed
Q4
Q2
Q3
Q4
|
Quarterly Update
Q4 - All agency managers and caseworkers, children’s court judges, and foster parents trained. Copies of curricula and attendance lists attached with this quarterly report.
Q2 - Curricula finalized and circulated within agency for comments; comments integrated and curricula approved by agency administrator. Copies of curricula attached with Q2 quarterly report.
Q3 - Curricula tested with sample group from each target audience; comments addressed in revised draft; and revised curricula circulated within agency for comments and then approved by agency administrator. Copies of sample audience comments attached with Q3 quarterly report.
Q4 - Agency managers and caseworkers statewide trained through in-person trainings and Web-assisted audioconferences. Copies of attendance lists attached with this quarterly report.
|
Action Steps and Benchmarks
3.2(D). Conduct training of judges, foster parents, and caseworkers |
Person Responsible
W. Chamber-lain
|
Evidence of Completion
Copies of attendance lists |
Quarter Due
Q4 |
Quarter Completed
Q4 |
Quarterly Update
Q4 - Children’s court judges and entering and existing foster parents trained statewide through in-person trainings. Copies of attendance lists attached with this quarterly report. |
3.3. Conduct policy review and revision, incorporating permanency planning principles
3.3(A). Assign members of Steering Committee representing both agency and court to use results of action step 3.1 to draft revisions to agency and court policies, respectively |
R. Barry
|
Copy of revised policy and
evidence of implementa-tion Copy of draft revisions |
Q4
Q2
|
Q4
Q2
|
Q4 - Policy review conducted and revisions made (see below). Copies of revised policies attached with this quarterly report.
Q2 - Revisions to existing agency/court policies drafted by three representatives of agency and three representatives of Administrative Office of Courts. Copies of draft revisions attached with Q2 quarterly report.
|
Action Steps and Benchmarks
3.3(B). Circulate revisions/obtain signoff of agency administrator and Office of the Chief Justice for policy changes
3.3(C). Final policy revisions reviewed/ approved by Steering Committee
|
Person Responsible
R. Barry
|
Evidence of Completion
Signed revised policies (Agency admini-strator and Administra-tive Office of Court)
Signed revised policies (Steering Committee) |
Quarter Due
Q3
Q4 |
Quarter Completed
Q3
Q4 |
Quarterly Update
Q3 - Drafts circulated to agency and court leadership and then shared between agency and court for final approval. Meeting held between agency and court midway through Q3 to work out final details. Copies of signed revised policies attached with Q3 report.
Q4 - Revised policies reviewed by Steering Committee subcommittee; revisions incorporated and circulated to full committee; final approval provided. Copies of signed revised policies attached with this quarterly report. |
3.4. Survey foster parents on willingness to accept concurrent placements
3.4(A). Use parameters provided in Steering Committee meeting in action step 3.1 to design draft survey instrument |
L. Bird |
Written summary of survey results
Draft instrument |
Q4
Q2
|
Q4
Q2
|
Q4 - Survey results collected, and report on results written. See below; attached with this quarterly report.
Q2 - Draft instrument developed by agency QA Unit, with oversight by Steering Committee subcommittee. Survey routed to subcommittee; comments incorporated, and revised survey routed to full Steering Committee, who approved the instrument. Draft instrument attached with Q2 report. |
Action Steps and Benchmarks
3.4 (B). Revise survey instrument and produce final version; test instrument with foster parent focus group, and make revisions
3.4(C). Administer surveys to all foster parents
|
Person Responsible
L. Bird |
Evidence of Completion
Draft instrument and focus group comments
Survey results |
Quarter Due
Q3
Q4 |
Quarter Completed
Q3
Q4 |
Quarterly Update
Q3 - Final survey instrument produced and tested with focus group. Per focus group comments, sections 3 and 4 revised significantly, and revised survey re-tested with new focus group. Final revisions made, and final approval provided by QA Unit manager and Steering Committee subcommittee. Draft instrument and two sets of focus group comments attached with Q3 report.
Q4 - Survey results collected, and report on results written. Results and report attached with this quarterly report. |
3.5. Update foster parent training to include concurrent planning module
3.5(A). Use survey results from action step 3.4 to develop concurrent planning module for inclusion in foster parent training
|
D. Cowens |
Copy of revised curriculum
Draft module |
Q4
Q4
|
Q4
Q4
|
Q4 - Revised module finalized (see below). Finalized module attached with this quarterly report.
Q4 - Concurrent planning module written by Training Unit, with oversight from Steering Committee subcommittee. Subcommittee provided extensive feedback to ensure that draft curriculum of reflected survey results from step 3.4. Draft module attached with this quarterly report.
|
Action Steps and Benchmarks
3.5(B). Have draft module reviewed/approved by Training Unit manager
3.5(C). Test new module with foster parent focus group, incorporate comments, and finalize |
Person Responsible
D. Cowens
|
Evidence of Completion
Draft module with approval signature of Training Unit manager
Focus group comments and finalized module |
Quarter Due
Q4
Q4 |
Quarter Completed
Q4
Q4 |
Quarterly Update
Q4 - Draft module routed to Training Unit manager, and comments incorporated; final signoff provided. Signed draft module attached with this quarterly report.
Q4 - Draft module tested with training focus group. Comments collected, and module revised by Training Unit; revised module approved by Training Unit manager and Steering Committee subcommittee. Focus group comments and revised module attached with this quarterly report. |
Renegotiated Action Steps and Benchmarks
|
|
|
|
|
|
Part B: National Standards Measurement Plan and Quarterly Status Report
Safety Outcome 1: Absence of Recurrence of Maltreatment |
||||||||||||
National Standard |
94.6% |
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured in Final Report/Source Data Period |
85.2%/FY 2007
|
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured at Baseline/Source Data Period |
83.7%/FY 2008a |
|||||||||||
Negotiated Improvement Goal |
84.2% |
|||||||||||
Renegotiated Improvement Goal |
None |
|||||||||||
Status (Enter the current quarter measurement for the reported quarter.) |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
Q4 |
Q5 |
Q6 |
Q7 |
Q8 |
Q9 |
Q10 |
Q11 |
Q12 |
83.9 |
83.8 |
84.0 |
84.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Safety Outcome 1: Absence of Maltreatment of Children in Foster Care |
||||||||||||
National Standard |
99.68% |
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured in Final Report/Source Data Period |
99.77%/FY 2007 |
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured at Baseline/Source Data Period |
99.82%/FY 2008a |
|||||||||||
Negotiated Improvement Goal |
NA; in substantial conformity |
|||||||||||
Renegotiated Improvement Goal |
None |
|||||||||||
Status (Enter the current quarter measurement for the reported quarter.) |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
Q4 |
Q5 |
Q6 |
Q7 |
Q8 |
Q9 |
Q10 |
Q11 |
Q12 |
NA |
NA |
NA |
NA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Permanency Outcome 1: Timeliness and Permanency of Reunification |
||||||||||||
National Standard |
122.6 |
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured in Final Report/Source Data Period |
101.5/FY 2007
|
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured at Baseline/Source Data Period |
103.0/FY 2008a |
|||||||||||
Negotiated Improvement Goal |
106.0 |
|||||||||||
Renegotiated Improvement Goal |
None |
|||||||||||
Status (Enter the current quarter measurement for the reported quarter.) |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
Q4 |
Q5 |
Q6 |
Q7 |
Q8 |
Q9 |
Q10 |
Q11 |
Q12 |
105.3 |
104.1 |
105.4 |
105.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Permanency Outcome 1: Timeliness of Adoptions |
||||||||||||
National Standard |
106.4 |
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured in Final Report/Source Data Period |
94.3/FY 2007
|
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured at Baseline/Source Data Period |
97.2/FY 2008a |
|||||||||||
Negotiated Improvement Goal |
101.2 |
|||||||||||
Renegotiated Improvement Goal |
None |
|||||||||||
Status (Enter the current quarter measurement for the reported quarter.) |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
Q4 |
Q5 |
Q6 |
Q7 |
Q8 |
Q9 |
Q10 |
Q11 |
Q12 |
98.7 |
101.2 (met) |
Met Q2 |
Met Q2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Permanency Outcome 1: Achieving Permanency for Children in Foster Care for Long Periods of Time |
||||||||||||
National Standard |
121.7 |
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured in Final Report/Source Data Period |
89.2/FY 2007
|
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured at Baseline/Source Data Period |
87.5/FY 2008a |
|||||||||||
Negotiated Improvement Goal |
90.0 |
|||||||||||
Renegotiated Improvement Goal |
None |
|||||||||||
Status (Enter the current quarter measurement for the reported quarter.) |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
Q4 |
Q5 |
Q6 |
Q7 |
Q8 |
Q9 |
Q10 |
Q11 |
Q12 |
87.7 |
87.9 |
87.2 |
87.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Permanency Outcome 1: Placement Stability |
||||||||||||
National Standard |
101.5 |
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured in Final Report/Source Data Period |
91.3/FY 2007
|
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured at Baseline/Source Data Period |
92.5/FY 2008a |
|||||||||||
Negotiated Improvement Goal |
95.3 |
|||||||||||
Renegotiated Improvement Goal |
None |
|||||||||||
Status (Enter the current quarter measurement for the reported quarter.) |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
Q4 |
Q5 |
Q6 |
Q7 |
Q8 |
Q9 |
Q10 |
Q11 |
Q12 |
93.4 |
90.1 |
90.9 |
92.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Part C: Item-Specific and Quantitative Measurement Plan and Quarterly Status Report
Outcome: Safety 2 Item: 4 |
||||||||||||
Performance as Measured in Final Report |
In 76% of cases reviewed, the agency conducted adequate risk assessments and safety management |
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured at Baseline/Source Data Period |
80%/State Quarterly QA Q4 07 |
|||||||||||
Negotiated Improvement Goal |
In 82% of cases, the agency will conduct adequate risk assessments and safety management |
|||||||||||
Method of Measuring Improvement |
Case reviews and State quality assurance reviews
|
|||||||||||
Renegotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Status (Enter the current quarter measurement for the reported quarter.) |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
Q4 |
Q5 |
Q6 |
Q7 |
Q8 |
Q9 |
Q10 |
Q11 |
Q12 |
74% |
73% |
75% |
77% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outcome: Permanency 1 Item: 7 |
||||||||||||
Performance as Measured in Final Report |
In 73% of cases reviewed, the agency established appropriate permanency goals for children or established goals in a timely manner |
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured at Baseline/Source Data Period |
82%/State QA quarterly summary Q4 07 |
|||||||||||
Negotiated Improvement Goal |
The agency will establish appropriate permanency goals for children or establish goals in a timely manner, utilizing the upper limit of a 95% confidence interval and with percent improvement adjusted by base size |
|||||||||||
Method of Measuring Improvement |
State and local quality assurance reviews, minimum sample size 60 cases per quarter |
|||||||||||
Renegotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Status (Enter the current quarter measurement for the reported quarter.) |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
Q4 |
Q5 |
Q6 |
Q7 |
Q8 |
Q9 |
Q10 |
Q11 |
Q12 |
81% |
79% |
82% (met) |
Met Q3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outcome: Permanency 1 Item: 17 |
||||||||||||
Performance as Measured in Final Report |
In 66% of cases reviewed, the needs and services of children, parents, and/or foster parents had been or were being adequately addressed by the agency |
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured at Baseline/Source Data Period |
72%/State QA quarterly summary Q4 07 |
|||||||||||
Negotiated Improvement Goal |
The needs and services of children, parents, and/or foster parents will be adequately addressed by the agency, utilizing the upper limit of a 95% confidence interval and with percent improvement adjusted by base size |
|||||||||||
Method of Measuring Improvement |
State and local quality assurance reviews, minimum sample size 60 cases per quarter |
|||||||||||
Renegotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Status (Enter the current quarter measurement for the reported quarter.) |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
Q4 |
Q5 |
Q6 |
Q7 |
Q8 |
Q9 |
Q10 |
Q11 |
Q12 |
70% |
68% |
71% |
71% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outcome: Child and Family Well-Being 1 Item: 18 |
||||||||||||
Performance as Measured in Final Report |
In 64% of applicable case records, the agency appropriately involved parents or children in developing the case plan |
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured at Baseline/Source Data Period |
70%/statewide supervisory review reports/Q4 07 |
|||||||||||
Negotiated Improvement Goal |
The agency will appropriately involve parents or children in developing the case plan and demonstrate improvement, utilizing the upper limit of a 95% confidence interval with percent improvement adjusted by base size |
|||||||||||
Method of Measuring Improvement |
Statewide supervisory review reports with minimum sample size of 120 cases per quarter |
|||||||||||
Renegotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Status (Enter the current quarter measurement for the reported quarter.) |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
Q4 |
Q5 |
Q6 |
Q7 |
Q8 |
Q9 |
Q10 |
Q11 |
Q12 |
70% |
71% |
69% |
76% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Systemic Factor: Case Review System Item: 26 |
||||||||||||
Performance as Measured in Final Report |
Area Needing Improvement |
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured at Baseline/Source Data Period |
86%/State CRB aggregate quarterly reports/Q2 07 |
|||||||||||
Negotiated Improvement Goal |
90% of cases will have court or administrative reviews occur at least every 6 months |
|||||||||||
Method of Measuring Improvement |
State CRB quarterly summary reports |
|||||||||||
Renegotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Status (Enter the current quarter measurement for the reported quarter.) |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
Q4 |
Q5 |
Q6 |
Q7 |
Q8 |
Q9 |
Q10 |
Q11 |
Q12 |
81% |
78% |
84% |
88% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Systemic Factor: Case Review System Item: 27 |
||||||||||||
Performance as Measured in Final Report |
Area Needing Improvement |
|||||||||||
Performance as Measured at Baseline/Source Data Period |
86%/State AOC aggregate annual reports, FY 07 |
|||||||||||
Negotiated Improvement Goal |
90% statewide permanency hearing completion rate within 12 months |
|||||||||||
Method of Measuring Improvement |
State AOC aggregate annual reports |
|||||||||||
Renegotiated Improvement Goal |
|
|||||||||||
Status (Enter the current quarter measurement for the reported quarter.) |
Q1 |
Q2 |
Q3 |
Q4 |
Q5 |
Q6 |
Q7 |
Q8 |
Q9 |
Q10 |
Q11 |
Q12 |
NA |
NA |
NA |
89% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Attachment E
List of CFSR Outcomes and Systemic Factors, and
Associated
Items, Data Indicators, and Data Composites
Safety Outcome 1: Children are, first and foremost, protected from abuse and neglect.
Item 1. Timeliness of initiating investigations of reports of child maltreatment.
Item 2. Repeat maltreatment.
Data Indicator: Absence of Recurrence of Maltreatment
Data Indicator: Absence of Maltreatment of Children in Foster Care
Safety Outcome 2: Children are safely maintained in their homes whenever possible and appropriate.
Item 3. Services to family to protect child(ren) in home and prevent removal or re-entry into foster care.
Item 4. Risk assessment and safety management.
Permanency Outcome 1: Children have permanency and stability in their living situations.
Item 5. Foster care re-entries.
Item 6. Stability of foster care placement.
Item 7. Permanency goal for child.
Item 8. Reunification,
guardianship, or permanent placement with relatives.
Item 9. Adoption.
Item 10. Other planned permanent living arrangement.
Permanency Composite 1: Timeliness and Permanency of Reunification
Permanency Composite 2: Timeliness of Adoptions
Permanency Composite 3: Achieving Permanency for Children in Foster Care for Long Periods of Time
Permanency Composite 4: Placement Stability
Permanency Outcome 2: The continuity of family relationships and connections is preserved for children.
Item 11. Proximity of foster care placement.
Item 12. Placement with siblings.
Item 13. Visiting with parents and siblings in foster care.
Item 14. Preserving connections.
Item 15. Relative placement.
Item 16. Relationship of child in care with parents.
Child and Family Well-Being Outcome 1: Families have enhanced capacity to provide for their children’s needs.
Item 17. Needs and services of child, parents, foster parents.
Item 18. Child and family involvement in case planning.
Item 19. Caseworker visits with child.
Item 20. Caseworker visits with parents.
Child and Family Well-Being Outcome 2: Children receive appropriate services to meet their educational needs.
Item 21. Educational needs of the child.
Child and Family Well-Being Outcome 3: Children receive adequate services to meet their physical and mental health needs.
Item 22. Physical health of the child.
Item 23. Mental/behavioral health of the child.
Systemic Factor: Statewide Information System
Item 24. The State is operating a statewide information system that, at a minimum, can readily identify the legal status, demographic characteristics, location, and goals for the placement of every child who is (or within the immediately preceding 12 months, has been) in foster care.
Systemic Factor: Case Review System
Item 25. The State provides a process that ensures that each child has a written case plan to be developed jointly with the child’s parent(s) that includes the required provisions.
Item 26. The State provides a process for the periodic review of the status of each child, no less frequently than once every 6 months, either by a court or by administrative review.
Item 27. The State provides a process that ensures that each child in foster care under the supervision of the State has a permanency hearing in a qualified court or administrative body no later than 12 months from the date the child entered foster care and no less frequently than every 12 months thereafter.
Item 28. The State provides a process for termination of parental rights proceedings in accordance with the provisions of the Adoption and Safe Families Act.
Item 29. The State provides a process for foster parents, pre-adoptive parents, and relative caregivers of children in foster care to be notified of, and have an opportunity to be heard in, any review or hearing held with respect to the child.
Systemic Factor: Quality Assurance System
Item 30. The State has developed and implemented standards to ensure that children in foster care are provided quality services that protect the safety and health of the children.
Item 31. The State is operating an identifiable quality assurance system that is in place in the jurisdictions where the services included in the Child and Family Services Plan are provided, evaluates the quality of services, identifies strengths and needs of the service delivery system, provides relevant reports, and evaluates implemented program improvement measures.
Systemic Factor: Staff and Provider Training
Item 32. The State is operating a staff development and training program that supports the goals and objectives in the Child and Family Services Plan, addresses services provided under titles IV-B and IV-E, and provides initial training for all staff who deliver these services.
Item 33. The State provides for ongoing training for staff that addresses the skills and knowledge base needed to carry out their duties with regard to the services included in the Child and Family Services Plan.
Item 34. The State provides training for current or prospective foster parents, adoptive parents, and staff of State licensed or approved facilities that care for children receiving foster care or adoption assistance under title IV-E that addresses the skills and knowledge base needed to carry out their duties with regard to foster and adopted children.
Systemic Factor: Service Array and Resource Development
Item 35. The State has in place an array of services that assess the strengths and needs of children and families and determine other service needs, address the needs of families in addition to individual children in order to create a safe home environment, enable children to remain safely with their parents when reasonable, and help children in foster and adoptive placements achieve permanency.
Item 36. The services in item 35 are accessible to families and children in all political jurisdictions covered in the State’s Child and Family Services Plan.
Item 37. The services in item 35 can be individualized to meet the unique needs of children and families served by the agency.
Systemic Factor: Agency Responsiveness to the Community
Item 38. In implementing the provisions of the Child and Family Services Plan, the State engages in ongoing consultation with tribal representatives, consumers, service providers, foster care providers, the juvenile court, and other public and private child- and family-serving agencies and includes the major concerns of these representatives in the goals and objectives of the Child and Family Services Plan.
Item 39. The agency develops, in consultation with these representatives, Annual Progress and Services Reports pursuant to the Child and Family Services Plan.
Item 40. The State’s services under the Child and Family Services Plan are coordinated with services or benefits of other Federal or federally assisted programs serving the same population.
Systemic Factor: Foster and Adoptive Parent Licensing, Recruitment, and Retention
Item 41. The State has implemented standards for foster family homes and child care institutions that are reasonably in accord with recommended national standards.
Item 42. The standards are applied to all licensed or approved foster family homes or child care institutions receiving title IV-E or IV-B funds.
Item 43. The State complies with Federal requirements for criminal background clearances as related to licensing or approving foster care and adoptive placements and has in place a case planning process that includes provisions for addressing the safety of foster care and adoptive placements for children.
Item 44. The State has in place a process for ensuring the diligent recruitment of potential foster and adoptive families who reflect the ethnic and racial diversity of children in the State for whom foster and adoptive homes are needed.
Item 45. The State has in place a process for the effective use of cross-jurisdictional resources to facilitate timely adoptive or permanent placements for waiting children.
Attachment F
Section I of this Technical Bulletin contains updated general instructions on Child and Family Services Review (CFSR) Program Improvement Plan (PIP) monitoring, evaluation, and renegotiation. Section II contains technical information for States and Children’s Bureau Regional Offices (CBROs) on using a matrix spreadsheet for PIP submissions. Section III contains technical information for States and CBROs on PIP monitoring and reporting.
In ACYF-CB-IM-07-08, we provided guidance and suggested a format for preparing PIPs for the second round of CFSRs. We are now updating that information for States and CBROs with an updated Excel matrix spreadsheet as well as suggested monitoring and reporting instructions. A PIP matrix and an example completed section of a PIP using the Excel format are included as attachments to this Technical Bulletin. Additional instructions on PIP development can be found here: www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/cwmonitoring/tools_guide/pip_instruct.htm
A. Guidelines for PIP monitoring and Evaluation
States are strongly encouraged to use the PIP Matrix that is described in Section II of this bulletin as part of their initial PIP submission and to report quarterly progress. The CBRO may then use the matrix to track PIP progress and response to States after the submission of quarterly reports. The PIP Matrix is designed to allow States to enter information by a broad strategy approach and link to the outcomes and items out of conformity that need to be addressed. Using a thematic or broad strategy approach provides a focus on overarching State reforms and organizes the PIP document in a way that may facilitate communication with a wider array of stakeholders. The PIP Matrix was developed to provide a summary of the State’s plan and to report progress. It is expected that more detailed information may be provided in supporting attachments and narratives.
The PIP Matrix includes all the basic information required for State and quarterly CBRO PIP status reporting. When action steps and benchmarks are not met within the quarter they are due, the matrix can accommodate a brief narrative explanation within the document. Action steps and goals included in the PIP can be evaluated for completion according to the approved PIP specifications. The CBRO and State may jointly determine on the basis of sufficient information whether the action steps have been completed and the goals achieved, along with completion dates. After approval by the CBRO, no further reporting will be required for the action steps, pertinent outcomes, or systemic factor goals during the PIP implementation process. Each quarter a conference call should be scheduled for a State and its CBRO before the CBRO provides written feedback to the State. After the conference call, the CBRO will return the matrix with comments to the State.
B. PIP Renegotiation Documentation
A State may request to renegotiate and modify its PIP with the CBRO if adjustments are necessary after PIP implementation. Renegotiation may occur regarding the timeframes for implementing program improvements, action steps to be used, or measurable goals. Requests for renegotiation and modification to a PIP may be submitted in writing or electronically to the CBRO for approval. The PIP Matrix may be used to document requested renegotiation of timeframes, steps, and goals. The CBRO will review and approve requested modifications or changes to the PIP and submit copies to the Children’s Bureau Central Office upon approval. Requests for renegotiation also may be documented in the quarterly status reports and filed according to the instructions in Section III.
A. GENERAL GUIDELINES FOR USE OF THE PIP MATRIX SPREADSHEET
The PIP Matrix spreadsheet (Appendix A) is the suggested format for PIP submission and the reporting and feedback mechanism to be used between the State and CBRO for every quarterly report. CB created the matrix in Excel to facilitate its use and correlate subsequent progress reporting to the original PIP. States should submit the entire spreadsheet, which includes the PIP Strategy Summary, TA Plan, and PIP Matrix, to the CBRO staff person responsible for accepting the State’s CFSR. We request that States submit the matrix in Excel rather than Adobe PDF so that it can be updated easily with information from the Regional Office. States that opt not to use the matrix still are required to provide quarterly status reports to ACF in the format used in the attached PIP Matrix. A blank PIP Matrix spreadsheet is in Appendix A, and an example of the PIP Matrix spreadsheet is in Appendix B.
Instructions for completing the sections and columns/cells in the PIP Matrix spreadsheet follow.
B. Instructions for PIP Strategy Summary and TA Plan
The PIP Strategy Summary and TA Plan consist of three sections as defined below:
Primary Strategies: In this section of the PIP Strategy Summary and TA Plan, the State summarizes the broad strategy approaches that address the key concerns from the CFSR and serve as a framework for goals/negotiated measures, benchmarks, and action steps. These approaches should reflect the overarching reforms and continuing strategies that address key concerns from the CFSR Final Report and build on prior PIP activity. The primary strategies should reflect integration with the timeframes of other plans, such as the CFSP. Each primary strategy should be assigned a unique number to allow cross-walking to action steps and benchmarks.
Key Concerns: In this section, the State summarizes the key concerns that will be addressed over the course of the PIP. These key concerns should be consistent with those identified in the Final Report of the CFSR.
TA Resources Needed: In this section, the State identifies the TA resources needed to carry out the provisions of the strategies for each year of the PIP. The source, frequency, and duration of the TA should be summarized and include both Federal and non-Federal sources.
C. Instructions for PIP Matrix Section
Introductory Information
At the top of the PIP Matrix, States will enter the information requested to identify their State, the type of report being submitted (PIP or quarterly), and the date.
Part A: Strategy Measurement Plan and Quarterly Status Report
This section of the PIP Matrix is designed to allow States to detail action steps that address the goals/negotiated measures and benchmarks and to report quarterly progress on each action step.
States will copy the table for part A for each of the strategies and action steps contained in their PIPs in order to address all the outcome items, data composite indicators, and systemic factor items that contributed to nonconformity.
States will complete the shaded cells only when using the matrix for quarterly reporting or for reporting the results of renegotiation. Instructions for each cell in part A follow.
Primary Strategy: (see: B. Instructions for PIP Strategy Summary and TA Plan above.)
Goal: States will describe the overall accomplishment to be achieved through the primary strategy that addresses applicable areas requiring improvement based on the Final Report.
Applicable CFSR Outcomes or Systemic Factors: States will identify the outcomes or systemic factors being addressed through the primary strategy and action steps. When multiple outcomes or systemic factors are addressed by a key strategy, it is recommended that States identify the outcome or systemic factor that is most directly affected by the key strategy. States are encouraged to employ overarching strategies but should avoid linking the same outcomes or systemic factor to multiple key strategies. States should consider that any potential withholding of funds because of failure to successfully complete a PIP is applied to each outcome or systemic factor not completed.
Applicable CFSR Items: States will specify the item(s) addressed by the key strategy based on those requiring improvement in the Final Report. Multiple items may be addressed by one key strategy as long as the items align with the applicable outcome or systemic factor as specified for the cell above.
Action Steps and Benchmarks: States will provide a brief description of each action step to be taken to create improvements under each goal. Benchmarks in this section can be qualitative processes and/or incremental quantitative measures of progress toward achieving the action step. States should list as many benchmarks as necessary for adequate monitoring of progress for each action step. Action steps and benchmarks will be numbered according to the primary strategy with which they are associated.
Person Responsible: States will identify the individual(s) responsible for action steps and benchmarks to clarify staff and stakeholder engagement and responsibility.
Evidence of Completion: States will specify expectations for completion of action steps. For example, training may be required when the referenced training is incorporated into a pre-service curriculum or when the State reaches a percentage of existing staff that have been trained. Documents or reports can provide the CBRO with evidence of progress and eventual completion of the action step. Although this may reflect a process measure, it does not require unnecessary documentation (such as lists of trainees or detailed meeting minutes); instead, details can be summarized as evidence the action step has been completed. Any referenced attached documents must include a name, title, and reference number.
Quarter Due: States will provide the quarter in which each action step or benchmark will be completed. This date should be entered as the last day of that quarter.
Quarter Completed: The CBRO will determine, based on reviews of State reports, the quarter in which each action step or benchmark is completed. This date should be entered as the last day of that quarter.
Quarterly Update: States will enter and report information regarding each action step or benchmark that is due during the quarter. When an action step is past due, States will explain with a revised completion date entered in the narrative. The CBRO will review the explanation and revised date and indicate in the remarks whether the extended due date is acceptable or flag the action step for renegotiation.
Part B: National Standards Measurement Plan and Quarterly Status Report
This section of the PIP Matrix allows States to enter and report information regarding each national standard data indicator that is to be addressed in their PIPs, including the following:
State performance as measured in the Final Report and the source data period for the data indicator
State performance as measured for the baseline established and the source data period for the data indicator
The negotiated improvement goal
The renegotiated improvement goal, if applicable
When using the PIP Matrix for quarterly reporting, States will enter the status of the data indicator for each reported quarter.
Part C: Item-Specific and Quantitative Measurement Plan and Quarterly Status Report
This section of the PIP Matrix allows States to enter and report information regarding each CFSR item or action step with quantitative measurement that is to be addressed in their PIPs, including the following:
The status of the item in the Final Report
The performance as measured for the baseline established and the source data period for the measure
The negotiated improvement goal
The method of measuring improvement
The renegotiated improvement goal, if applicable
When using the PIP Matrix for quarterly reporting, States will enter the status of the action step or item measurement indicator for each reported quarter. States will copy the table for part C as many times as necessary in order to address all the items contained in their PIPs.
A. Updating Matrix Cells for Quarterly Reporting
Quarter Completed: The CBRO will determine, based on a review of a State’s reports, the quarter in which each action step or benchmark is completed. This column will be completed by the CBRO and will indicate whether the action step/benchmark has been completed satisfactorily or is incomplete. The CBRO will fill in this column in response to the State’s quarterly report; the State should not enter any information in that column. This date will be entered as the last day of the quarter reported.
Quarterly Update: States will enter and report information regarding each action step or benchmark that is due or past due for that quarter. States will also note here any evidence of completion that will be attached for each action step or benchmark. States will provide the name and title for each attached document and will indicate the action step number or benchmark the document is associated with so that the document can be easily referenced.
Renegotiated Action Steps and Benchmarks: If applicable, States will note whether the action step and/or benchmarks are identified for renegotiation and provide a detailed description.
B. Quarterly Reporting of Measurement Data—PartS B and C
In Part B of the matrix, if a State is running its own composite data and uses the data in quarterly reporting, the State may include its calculated percentage in the cells for each quarter being reported. Once the data have been verified by CB’s Data Team, the CBRO will include that percentage in the cell, note it as “CB data” and will note whether the item is “achieved,” “not achieved,” or “pending.” (“Pending” would be used in instances in which the CB Data Team does not yet have the AFCARS or NCANDS data required for verification. Once the data are verified, the cell will be updated in the next quarterly report.)
In Part C of the matrix, the CBRO will indicate “achieved,” “not achieved,” or “pending” (“pending” would be used when there are questions about the validity of the data and further action is required by the State) under the percentage provided by the State.
The Notes cell in parts B and C is for details concerning the status of measurement or verification of data by either the State or CB.
C. CBRO Response to PIP quarterly reports
The
CBRO will respond in a letter to a State’s quarterly report
within 1 month of the date of receipt. The letter will reference the
matrix for information about action steps that have been completed
that quarter. The letter will include information about measurement
goals and identify the goals that have been met successfully and/or
those that are pending verification. If there are questions regarding
the status of an action step/benchmark after the review of the
quarterly report, the CBRO will add comments or questions to the
quarterly update column (under the State’s comments and in a
different color to facilitate review) for the State.
It
is important to consider that including a number of, or prolonged,
comments could lengthen the document considerably and make it
difficult to use as intended. It is recommended that a conference
call with the State be held prior to the CBRO’s final response
to the quarterly report so that questions about the report can be
raised in the call. The recommended conference call with the State
should take place within the month after the quarterly status report
is received by CBRO before a response is due to the State.
If the State completes an action step/benchmark that is not due until subsequent quarters, the State will note the quarter in which the completion occurred in the quarterly update column. The CBRO will indicate whether the action is “completed” satisfactorily or is “incomplete” in the quarter completed column.
D. Saving documents
The
PIP Matrix is intended to serve as a cumulative record over the
2-year implementation period. States and Regional Offices will
maintain records of updates made to the original document. A modified
PIP Matrix document may be used with each new quarter as long as the
files show a full record of all changes from the original document.
Because the matrix will be updated each quarter by the State and by
the CBRO, it will be necessary to save each version of the updated
document every quarter in both an Excel file that can be edited and a
PDF file.
It is recommended that the State and CBRO
determine a naming convention for the documents; for example, a
document updated by the State could be saved as pipq1statename.xls,
and that document updated by the CBRO could be saved as
pipq1statename_ro.xls.
Ideally, the matrix should be updated only once per quarter by the
State and then by the RO. Comments or questions inserted by the RO
can be addressed by the State in the subsequent quarter.
It
is recommended that States save and submit the updated PIP Matrix
document and all supporting documents for each quarter on a CD or
removable storage device and submit that to the CBRO. The saved file
will serve as the record of documentation for each quarter. The State
and the CBRO should each have a copy of this record for every quarter
in both formats.
Enclosures:
Appendix A—PIP Matrix Excel Spreadsheet (PDF - 232 KB)
Appendix B—PIP Matrix Spreadsheet Example (PDF - 225 KB)
| File Type | application/msword |
| File Title | Cover sheet |
| Author | All Employees of JBS JBS Inc |
| File Modified | 2009-09-28 |
| File Created | 2009-09-28 |