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.
Showing posts with label safe case closure. Show all posts
Showing posts with label safe case closure. Show all posts
Monday, October 24, 2011
Monday, March 15, 2010
Not a perfect fit
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?
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?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)