22.01.2015 Views

STATE OF NEVADA - Division of Child and Family Services

STATE OF NEVADA - Division of Child and Family Services

STATE OF NEVADA - Division of Child and Family Services

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Table 08: CFSR Data Pr<strong>of</strong>ile Information for Repeat Maltreatment<br />

CHILD SAFETY PR<strong>OF</strong>ILE<br />

Absence <strong>of</strong> Maltreatment Recurrence [st<strong>and</strong>ard: 94.6% or<br />

more; national median=93.3%,25 th percentile=91.50%<br />

Absence <strong>of</strong> <strong>Child</strong> Abuse <strong>and</strong>/or Neglect in Foster Care (12<br />

months) [st<strong>and</strong>ard 99.68% or more; national median=99.5,<br />

25 th percentile=99.30]<br />

Fiscal year 2008ab<br />

12-month period<br />

Ending 3/31/209<br />

(08B09A)<br />

Fiscal Year 2009ab<br />

95.1 Not Submitted 93.9<br />

99.56 Not Submitted 99.54<br />

Safety Outcome 2: <strong>Child</strong>ren are safely maintained in their homes whenever possible<br />

Item 3: <strong>Services</strong> to families to protect children in home <strong>and</strong> prevent removal or re-entry into<br />

foster care<br />

Goal: To determine whether the State is making concerted efforts to provide services to the family to prevent children’s<br />

entry into foster care or re-entry after a reunification.<br />

To meet this goal, the State projected that an evaluation <strong>of</strong> case records would be needed to determine if concerted<br />

efforts were made to provide or arrange for appropriate services for the family to protect children <strong>and</strong> prevent their entry<br />

into foster care or re-entry into foster care after a reunification. Further, the State projected that if a child was removed<br />

from the home without providing for or arranging for services that the action was necessary to ensure the child’s safety. A<br />

further objective is that the above information would be documented appropriately in UNITY in a minimum <strong>of</strong> 90% <strong>of</strong><br />

applicable cases. Table 9 shows that Nevada as a whole is not currently meeting this goal as reported in the Nevada<br />

2009 CFSR report. For Clark County <strong>and</strong> the DCFS – Rural Region this item is an area that needs improvement.<br />

However, based on the CFSR 2009 data, Washoe County shows this to be an area <strong>of</strong> strength.<br />

Table 09: SFY 2010 Data for Item 3<br />

Item 3: <strong>Services</strong> to family to protect child(ren) in<br />

the home <strong>and</strong> prevent removal or re-entry into CFSR 2009 NV Goal Goal Met<br />

foster care.<br />

Statewide 78% 90%* No<br />

Clark County 60% 90%* No<br />

Washoe County 100% 90%* Yes<br />

DCFS Rural Region 77% 90%* No<br />

*Unless otherwise negotiated or if exceeds federal requirements<br />

Item 4: Risk assessment <strong>and</strong> safety management<br />

Goal: To determine whether the State is making concerted efforts to assess <strong>and</strong> address the risk <strong>and</strong> safety concerns<br />

relating to the child(ren) in their own homes or while in foster care.<br />

To meet this goal, there are several objectives planned in the <strong>Child</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Family</strong> <strong>Services</strong> Plan. These focus on initial risk<br />

assessment, ongoing assessment <strong>of</strong> risk, <strong>and</strong> safety assessment. Safety concerns focuses providing assessments on<br />

the child’s living environment (both in the home <strong>and</strong> in foster care), during visitation with family members, <strong>and</strong> in trial<br />

home visits. A further objective is to ensure that this information is appropriately documented in UNITY in 90% <strong>of</strong> cases.<br />

Data from the 2009 CFSR, as shown in Table 10 below indicates that Nevada is not currently reaching this goal.<br />

Table 10: SFY 2010 Data for Item 4<br />

Item 4: Risk assessment <strong>and</strong> safety management CFSR 2009 NV Goal Goal Met<br />

Statewide 55% 90%* No<br />

Clark County 50% 90%* No<br />

Washoe County 78% 90%* No<br />

DCFS Rural Region 39% 90%* No<br />

*Unless otherwise negotiated or if exceeds federal requirements<br />

Nevada APSR – SFY 2010<br />

Page 21 <strong>of</strong> 108

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!