Journey of Partnership

Where can we really create change?

2012-01-17T13:44:00.000-08:00

Connie:

We let the team determine the major areas that we shouldtalk about. First we wrote down everything that we could think of that we thoughtwe could improve. Then we asked ourselves, “What can we take off from this listthat will really create change?"

The team landed on family team meetings and familyinteractions – really looking at that process and coming up with a commonunderstanding among all the professionals involved, and strategies to improvethe process.

We purposefully mixed up the discussion groups for themaximum diversity of roles, experience, and background, and then went towork. One really impressive observationI had was about the discussions themselves. We had identified champions of thecollaborative process early on, and they had been a part of the monthlyplanning sessions leading up to the mini-summits, with the understanding thatthey would act as facilitators. But it ended up we didn’t even need thefacilitators to guide discussions back on track!

Focus on Safe Case Closure

2012-01-02T08:02:00.001-08:00

Jamie:

For the “Purple Team,” we focused on Family Safety, Risk,and Permanency (FSRP) Services for our work at the mini-summit, really zeroingin on safe case closure, which is the outcome we want for all FSRP cases.

While talking about how we could improve our services, a keyissue that kept popping up was “proactive relationships,” so we decided todevote considerable mini-summit time to creating strategies for more proactiverelationships.

We identified many strengths, especially around thecontribution of different ranges of expertise and working together aroundspecific issues. We also identifiedareas of improvement, and a great deal of that revolved around communication. As partners, we could see the potential forimprovements.

Creating the Opportunity for Shared Success

2011-12-13T12:44:00.001-08:00

Connie:

We developed a group that met monthly to design andimplement the mini-summits. We started the planning process with the basics,such as who to invite, how to make it convenient for people in a widegeographical are to attend, how long it would be, etc.

When we talked about who should participate, that reallybrought to the surface how important collaboration would be in improvingservices. When we talk about coordinating services for families, a lot ofpeople are involved from so many areas. Casting a broad net of participantsgave us a comprehensive approach to improving services.

Jamie took charge of the “Purple Team,” which focused on Pottawattamie,Mills, and Fremont counties. I organized the “Pink Team,” representing Audubon,Carroll, Greene, Guthrie, Cass, Montgomery, Page, and Taylor counties.

Jamie and I took the momentum from the statewide summit and pluggedit into localized mini-summits.

Ideas Welcome Here!

2011-11-21T10:57:00.001-08:00

Jamie:

I agree 100% with Connie’s impression of the statewide summit.It was such a great experience to have the free exchange of ideas, butespecially under the auspices of collaboration. Going into the meeting with themutual understanding of shared ownership of goals and outcomes is somethingnew, and establishing that from the beginning opens the door to a whole new setof conversations.

When Connie first started talking about holding a regionalmini-summit, I got pretty excited. I knew that bringing that approach to alocal level could really bring private and public agencies, as well as otherpartners involved with families together, and that we could develop bettersolutions together.

Shared Goal of Helping Families Succeed

2011-11-07T07:41:00.000-08:00

Connie:

I’d heard about the work the Child Welfare Partners Committee (CWPC) was doing, but I didn’t know what to expect when I attended the statewide summit. To experience the open exchange of ideas and discussion was truly enlightening.

Everyone brought their unique perspective and together we were able to generate real momentum, which we can translate into better outcomes for families.

When we held our first local mini-summit, that day was probably one of the most positive and productive days in my career. It was wonderful to sit at the table with such a diverse range of professionals – child protective staff, social work case managers, judges, supervisors, family team meeting facilitators…We asked the question, “What are our strengths?”

We talked about how we could apply those to the challenges we face. Then we talked about what wasn’t working, and which were the most important issues to problem-solve to achieve the outcomes we need.Essentially we focused on the fact that everyone at the mini-summit shared the same goal of helping families succeed. We may serve in different roles, but we’re unified in that goal.

Summit Meetings

2011-10-24T07:09:00.000-07:00

In June 2010, professionals from all over Iowa, from many different roles, met for a one-day summit, the Child Welfare Partnership Summit. The focus was improving outcomes for Iowa children and families and reinforce partnership at all levels.

Each of the five (5) DHS service areas was represented by a team of 20 participants to the summit. The teams comprised of DHS Front Line Supervisors, Provider (Safety Plan/FSRP Services and Iowa KidsNet) Front Line Supervisors, DHS Front Line Staff, and Provider (Safety Plan/FSRP Services and Iowa KidsNet) Front Line Staff.

The summit was neither training nor downloading of information. The majority of the summit was spent in facilitated dialogue about how well DHS and Providers are working together as partners, both on specific practice issues as well as on the respectful relationships needed to support good practice. The breakout sessions included the following topics:

1. Child and Family Service Review (CFSR) Outcomes

2. Conflict Resolution

3. Partnership Trickledown

4. Safe Case Closure

Based on the statewide summit for private and public agency employees, each service area was asked to take the information learned and use it to further the partnering initiative locally. We'll follow the story of two individuals who did just that in the west side of the state. These mini-summits in the west side of the state continue to date.

Connie tells her story from a perspective of an Iowa Department of Human Services (public) representative. Jamie tells her story as someone from a provider (private) agency.

A difference in the way our staff interact

2011-04-01T14:25:00.000-07:00

Since the implementation of FSRP, the involvement in cases has really changed at the supervisory level. We established joint meetings between public and private agency staff, and we even look forward to them! We now have the ability to assess how we’re working together. What’s working and if there’s something that’s not working – what ideas can we come up with jointly to make it work?

There’s certainly a difference in the way our staff interact. Establishing regular meetings together and modeling working together has really opened up the possibilities for working on cases. The interactions between supervisors just weren’t there before, and the collaborative approach has only brought about positive change.

We even do more trainings together. When we’re literally sitting in the same room, hearing the same thing, we’ve got an advantage. When we hear each other’s questions we gain more perspective on what each other faces, and where we’re coming from. We also hear the exact same answers, which helps us all get on the same page.

Taking it one step further, private and public agency supervisors now discuss what their staff needs are to determine what trainings will take place. Again, we are learning more about each other and process the same information together.

Jody

Now Relatives are Engaged

2011-02-28T09:55:00.000-08:00

One particularly interesting thing about involving more relatives that we used to is what we hear from them. Most relatives felt they had to jump through several hoops to be involved in the case of a family member. They felt intimidated, obstructed or both. Now we openly seek out relatives who can supervise visits, transport family members, provide respite or provide temporary care for children.

We’ve heard relatives say no one ever asked them in the past. Now it’s standard operation!

It’s the same with family friends. There was a standing misperception that if a family has an issue, all the friends of the family would be considered the same. I’ve heard Jody talk about a good friend of a mom that came to a family team meeting. She attended, but she sat in the corner and didn’t talk. Jody brought her in the conversation and in on the solution-focus by saying directly to her, “I’m counting on you to help her meet her requirements. Because you are so important to her, YOU can make it happen.”

We’re always paying attention during family visits to note visitors or people mentioned in conversation who may be a good addition to that informal support team. We sometimes literally use the line, “Wait a minute…who was that?” to discover additional team members.

In the end, all of this is important because it establishes trust, which makes success possible. We have to establish it with the families and with the people who touches the families. This is what we really try to model with our staff – we communicate with each other and build that trust, and we build that same trust with the families.

The Group Helped Her Get There

2011-01-24T06:20:00.000-08:00

Another great example is a family who had worked with DHS previously without much success, and she was resistant to taking advantage of mental health services. Taking a similar approach, we invited individuals from her church, a school counselor who took an interest in the children, and a family friend to participate in the case.

Involving people the family already knew and trusted made it easier to find somewhere the kids could stay while the mom worked on her goals. The kids had an easier transition and the mom was more engaged in her goals because she knew the people her kids were staying with.

Again, bucking tradition, we secured permission for members of the informal support group to transport the kids and supervise visits between the kids and their father, who was in jail. Not only did this help the kids, but it also gave the mother time to attend the other children’s school and sporting events, so that she could play an active part in their lives.

Involving her personal contacts in monthly team meetings and having them participate in the discussions with professionals had a great impact on the success of this case. Not only did this build trust, but it also prompted honesty among those that knew the mom well. As a result, the group as a whole was able to encourage her to get her mental health needs addressed. She had resisted past attempts by DHS to get help with her mental health, but the group helped her get there. And guess what? The results were incredible.

Addressing Barriers Quicker

2010-12-20T07:02:00.000-08:00

We’ve seen a significant benefit in the increased family team meetings and the addition of “nontraditional” participants. In fact, we’ve seen that these additional people feel empowered when they find out that their participation can positively impact the children’s future and the parents’ success.

It’s exciting for all of us, though, to see each other discarding the silos of roles and getting back to the basics of focusing on results. When we partner together, we push up our sleeves, jump in and rely on each other to focus on solutions and not roles. Even better, we’ve gone even further and explored the potential of new roles for families’ personal network.

We’ve been able to address barriers more quickly, so it provides results more quickly. And who can’t appreciate that?

The natural advantage to bringing in more people is that we’re also building an informal support system for the family. Our work is intensive while the case is open, so you can imagine what an adjustment it can be when suddenly we’re out of the picture. Those additional people and the informal supports they create are key, because they will be involved with the family long after we are gone. We have to identify people in the families’ lives that can take the ball when we step aside.

Heidi

Family Team Meetings

2010-12-09T18:35:00.000-08:00

Utilizing family team meetings has been a great way to come together to support a family. Uniting everyone is so beneficial, especially on a complicated case.

Family team meetings are a critical way to engage parents, attorneys and other stakeholders. However, through collaboration, we began holding them more often, evolving past the one-time-only engagement. When we held additional family meetings, we were able to engage “nontraditional” members in the meetings like people from the family’s church, school staff, friends and relatives.

Traditionally, cases started with a family team meeting, the assessment and case plan was written, and that was it for family meetings. As we get to know the families after the team meeting, we learn about more people who are influential in the lives of the families - people who can potentially make a significant impact in the success of the family. But we only find out about those individuals by blending the work and knowledge of everyone on the team.

We’ve also recognized that to reach our mutual goals, we have to step out of our comfort zone and break free of traditional roles. A common barrier has traditionally been client transportation, especially when it comes to resources. In the past we may have walked away from the issue because it was someone else’s responsibility. Now we look at these other people in the families’ personal network and seek out those individuals and identify how they can fill in that gap – a gap that can be so detrimental to the families’ success.

Jody

Getting the whole team involved

2010-11-18T06:13:00.000-08:00

Working in a partnership model has been a great boost for employee morale. When we’re meeting as a team, supervisors for both public and private agencies have an opportunity to model for staff. When Heidi is in a meeting with staff from both agencies, she will provide great input and consultation. Her staff sees that and can feel comfortable speaking up and giving their input. They are inspired to take part in the conversation and the solutions. My staff sees that it is a partnership and that it takes information from everyone to make the best solution.

We are also in a position to help each other support our staff. We’re all working with the same family, and since we’re communicating, we experience the ups and downs of a case together. That enables staff to respond to issues on the case quicker, but also to support each other. The unique perspective we each bring to the case is important, which is why case management is structured the way it is.

Jody

Communication and Trust

2010-10-18T06:22:00.000-07:00

The benefits of consistent communication have been clear. When people are involved, there is naturally opportunity for change. When things change or when issues arise, it’s critical to have everyone involved in the problem-solving process. Our best ideas are born when we have more information, so we make communication a priority.

When we’re communicating regularly, we all know who is doing what, and we have the freedom to talk about the why. When you’re building trust with a family, it’s so important to all be on the same page. It’s important for the family to know that everyone is working toward the same goal, which is the best outcome for everyone.

When we work together and everyone knows what the other is doing, we also know that when we come back together, we can predict where the family will be in their progress. This minimizes the need for problem solving and makes it easier for the family and everyone involved in the case to see where we made progress and what we need to work on.

It’s been great to see the collaboration between our staff.

Heidi

Partnership in Permanency: consistency and communication

2010-10-04T08:59:00.000-07:00

This next series of posts gives some insight to partnership within Iowa's Family, Risk & Permanency services...

To public and private agency employees, partnership can be seen if you look into the core of a relationship. It’s how well you know the person on the other end.

The next series of blog posts will take you down the path of two supervisors involved with FSRP (Family Safety, Risk, and Permanency) services which are designed to provide support to families and connect them to resources when they’re involved in the child welfare system. The services help them manage self sufficiency and child safety. Jody is a supervisor on the public side and Heidi is a supervisor for a private agency. They have worked together on cases and seen the real benefits of partnership and collaboration.

Jody: The most obvious way we collaborate is consistent communication. Supervisors from both the public and private agencies meet on a regular basis to discuss how things are going. While that always seems like common sense in theory, the tricky part is to make it happen.

There are many sides to keeping each other up-to-date on a case that you are mutually responsible for. First of all, the start of a case is immediate and everyone has to mobilize in a quick timeframe. In the beginning, there is so much discovery involved, and it’s important to keep communication open so that we can decide the best strategies to meet the defined goals.

We literally come together to staff cases – it’s not just a matter of being assigned to the same case. Everyone has an equal voice when we talk about hurdles and what we can do about them. It’s all about being solution-focused. In the past there wasn’t a forum for clinical consultation, but working in the model of partnership, we come up with better solutions because of the inclusive working environment. We’ve gone from a crisis-driven mode to a collaborative mode, and our staff is doing their best work ever.

Looking back (the private agency perspective)

2010-05-02T20:27:00.000-07:00

There is perhaps the misconception that partnership means we’re buddies. That’s not what it’s about - this partnership is a redefined, clearly understood shared accountability. A conversation about results is not just whether or not something is working. It is what do we do differently? And why?

Again, note the “we.” Talking about what “we” can do frees us up to acknowledge our own challenges, because we know the focus will be on how we can solve problems, rather than pointing out each other’s faults.

One of the values of being part of this team is now I understand my public agency partners and the context in which they work better. I have a clearer sense of their challenges unique to that world, and how they differ from mine. This understanding helps inform my future interactions.

Looking back (from the public agency perspective)

2010-04-13T15:21:00.000-07:00

The work is done; the recommendation has been implemented.

Reflecting on the team’s work together, this experience has already impacted agency interactions outside of this task force.

Statewide public and private agencies will continue to have issues of challenging each other, but this opens up the door for clinical conversations which enhance and make the partnership more effective. There’s less finger pointing and talk of “You’re not doing this right…” We talk about how we can come together to figure out how we can do “that’ better.

Nationwide we’ve found there is not much insight on how to move performance contracting forward. The one thing we’ve heard over and over is that the communication and the relationship makes or breaks it.

When all parties commit to open communication, it creates an understanding that leads us to a better working relationship. Taking that relationship to a higher level exposes the reality that we really can see better results.

In the end…

2010-03-30T07:13:00.000-07:00

While we wrestled with those questions, a natural progression in the conversation was to staff. More than ever, we needed to support front line staff and supervisors to help them realize the results we will achieve together.

How did we do this? Again – we focused on practice. Keeping front line staff and supervisors from both public and private agencies in mind, we discussed what they would need to be successful together. Success was defined as the outcome of the case, and this success can not be achieved without both agencies problem solving together.

In the end this team, whose charge was to recommend changes for a payment structure, created a recommendation that contained more language about practice improvement than payment.

Not a perfect fit

2010-03-15T15:03:00.000-07:00

To define our route, we first asked the question, “How are we doing today?” (Notice “we”). We pulled some data and looked at some individual cases. Focusing on practice alone, we said, “Our goal is to do better. Let’s do it.”

Reality was that we were doing well. But the goal is to do better, so we identified cases that just don’t “fit” typical case progression. Then we asked the question, “How do we deal with the cases that don’t “fit?”

“When a case doesn’t “fit,” what is the practice that supports the safety of the child and the family – that can keep the agency involved?” We looked at practice and practicality – if disincentives are used to manage outcomes, at what level can agencies sustain providing services?

The first concern is the safety of the child and family, so how do we define a manageable approach to these cases? Most important – what is a manageable approach that both private and public agencies can successfully work together on?

A different kind of conversation

2010-02-28T19:46:00.000-08:00

It’s easy to point the finger and tell others what they’re doing wrong, but not as easy to talk in front of everyone about what you’re doing wrong. One of our team members was instrumental in setting the tone for the team’s success. She talked about reviewing hundreds of cases and finding where her own staff struggled to meet expected outcomes. In front of all of us, she said the framework just wasn’t working. She said, “I need to figure out with you how to make this work.”

A few simple words that changed the conversation.

We decided to define the end at the beginning; start with the end in mind. How do we define “safe case closure?” And the result was rich conversation that focused on the work we share.

Once the trust and relationship is there, things just start happening. Instead of protecting who is “right” or “wrong” everyone’s energy is spent on innovation, problem solving and the future.

Let’s not talk about money…let’s talk about what we want to achieve.

2010-02-15T17:01:00.000-08:00

Historically public and private agencies walked into meetings in our perceived roles: the state has a regulatory/compliance role and the private agency has the responsibility to fulfill a contract. Deciding that our first meeting would center around what we want to achieve and our shared responsibility to achieve a common objective kept us focused on what was important. By concentrating on the best way to keep kids safe, we were able to see how our roles compliment each other

When we prepared for the first meeting of the task force, we agreed: Let’s not talk about money – let’s talk about what we want to achieve.

Fortunately we both agreed this was the best approach for our first meeting. When we all came together for the first time - focused on the objective – something remarkable happened. We started out talking about the practice of keeping kids safe. That’s what we’re all about. That’s what we know.

In the room were two Chief Executive Officers of human service agencies, a program manager and two levels of DHS administrative personnel. The total years of experience in human services in that room tipped the scales, and we started our task of defining a pay structure by talking about best practice in keeping kids safe.

Another leg of the journey

2010-01-31T15:14:00.000-08:00

The next collection of posts is a workgroup formed to address a specific issue. Evan represents the Iowa Dept. of Human Services and Doug represents a private agency.

First Things First

Another example of partnership in practice is the FSRP Safe & Timely Case Closure Workgroup.

Charged with a fast-track task, the team needed to perform an in-depth analysis of the current Family Safety Risk & Permanency (FSRP) contract configuration and recommend changes for the payment structure. The FSRP program is relatively new – it’s how we work with families that have documented abuse or neglect.

Key to our results was the decision to first take time to think through the best practices of keeping children safe. We realized we couldn’t talk about payments at all until we talked about how we work together so that we can jointly do the best job for Iowa’s kids and families.

Naturally, successful practice is first and foremost when we work in child welfare, but the public and private agencies had unique insight from their own perspectives. And that insight included what was going well…and what wasn’t.

2010-01-04T11:51:00.000-08:00

Right – we had this great experience with finding out the best way to train staff and families on Family Interaction, and then it turned into other opportunities. We took the training and built it into DHS internal new worker training. Everyone was so excited about the success of the training, and the inclusive atmosphere, that we started thinking how this could translate into other areas.

We have these monthly meetings about contracts with providers (private agencies) and we try to problem solve. Well, after the Family Interaction trainings we thought, “A-ha!” and realized providers should be in on those meetings, too! Public and private agencies have the same goal: child safety, permanency and well-being. We have different experiences and different observations that can help us achieve that goal. Together.

It’s really spilled over into what we do every day. And that’s the whole purpose, right?

Wendy

Family Interaction

2009-12-21T13:21:00.000-08:00

When you perform work under a contract, your client tells you what you need to do and, often, how to do it. When DHS decided Family Interaction was important to keep Iowa’s kids safe, it became something that agencies needed to do. But they asked the private side to help figure out how to do it. Not literally – not how you write a family interaction plan - but how we all implement a new practice as a standard.

This was one of our first projects to test the collaborative process. We assembled our best champions of the practice – from public and private agencies, from our families, and other advocates. We used phone calls, meetings, trial trainings and geographical considerations to adjust the curriculum to fit Iowa’s needs and customized the training to fit the needs of different service areas.

What we did was involve several stakeholders in the process. What we saw was the voices of many gives us a bigger picture and a better solution.

When we held regional trainings, you should have seen the trainers – they were excited to teach, and the attendees could feel it. Sometimes training can be a bit tiring, but you could feel the energy at these trainings. (Chris)

For example...

2009-12-09T11:35:00.000-08:00

There is a practice called Family Interaction that helps parents whose children are in foster care learn from foster families. It’s proven effective and nationally recognized as something that helps birth parents create a safe home for the child(ren) to return to.

We knew it was something great, but we needed to figure out how to communicate how it works and why we believe in it. We needed to explain it to birth families, to foster families, to agency employees and to court officials. So in this new partnership approach, guess what we did?

We asked people that already recognized the value to help us spread the word to their peers. No preset ideas. No training as usual. We wanted out of the box. And guess what? When we asked, we got it!

Chris and I took on Family Interaction together, and we started with our agencies. What did our staff know? Who did our staff know that already practiced Family Interaction? What did families think of it? What was practical and what was not?

Wendy

Private Agencies

2009-11-30T09:22:00.001-08:00

I’m up for talking – in human services, it’s what we do. What will be strange is talking in this format.

But I can do this, because I’ve been a part of the committee and it’s been great work. From a private agency viewpoint, this partnership gives us the opportunity to become part of an incredible journey that will create a new culture in child welfare. Public and private agencies have been working together for many years, but building a formal partnership that commits stakeholders to something that will benefit everyone in the end – that’s just good practice.

I’ll be talking about the work we’ve done and the work we’ll keep doing. And I can’t wait to see what turns we take along the way!

-Chris

From the public agency perspective...

2009-11-24T06:39:00.001-08:00

The first thing I thought when I was asked to co-author this blog was, “Why? Who wants to read it?”

I have been assured that I have something to offer, and as I think about it, I guess I do talk about what we’re doing every day – I just don’t put a label on it.

At DHS, we’re used to talking a lot about compliance. The people I work with are genuinely concerned about the welfare of kids and families, and we need guidelines – formal and informal, that provide the best results for kids and families.

Since the creation of CWPC, there’s more conversation about how those guidelines help or hinder the shared goals of public and private agencies. There’s more conversation about how an agency could best work within overall expectations and how many options we can look at to meet everyone’s needs. There’s just more conversation. Conversations with more people. We have more ideas, more evaluation, more questions asked. More information to make better decisions.

I’ll be talking about those conversations, and about the experiences I have that lead me through this journey.

-Wendy

Introducing a blog about…a journey.

2009-11-16T10:10:00.000-08:00

A journey can take you many places you never dreamed you’d go. You can start at Point A, expecting to end at Point B, but you eventually discover Points C, D, J, and L were the most important legs of your journey.

In Iowa, we’ve embarked on a journey of partnership. We left behind our historical culture of separate entities working independently and are finding our way down a path of collaboration. With a shared destination guiding us, we are discovering how we can help each other find the best way. We are evolving beyond our roles and focusing instead on our shared outcomes.

Simply put, the journey is collaboration, communication and problem solving. It’s partnering with people around you. But it’s not always so easy to put into practice.

That’s why the Child Welfare Partners Committee (CWPC) was created. We all know we need to collaborate, but the day-to-day realities of our jobs can make collaboration a luxury.

In Iowa, families and children are a priority, so the Iowa Department of Human Services (DHS) and private human services agencies committed to create a unified approach to delivering child welfare services – the CWPC.

Two representatives from this committee – one from DHS and one from a private agency, will share their experiences of shared accountability, a commitment to collaboration and how it translates into better results for Iowa’s kids and families. Wendy and Chris will share what this partnership looks like as it blossoms into a fruitful environment for child welfare services.