The following documents are attachments to the 2008 Dept of ...

The following documents are attachments to the 2008 Dept ofChildren and Families Annual Progress and Services Report (APSR).The report can be obtained from:http://centerforchildwelfare.fmhi.usf.edu/kb/flres/DCF_APSR_June2008.pdf

Florida Department ofChildren and FamiliesStrategic Intent2008 - 2010January 17, 2008Charlie CristGovernorBob ButterworthSecretary, 2008

Strategic Intent for 2008 - 2010The Secretary’s Strategic Intent gives guidance and summarizes the Department’s majorinitiatives for 2008 - 2010. This document provides the Secretary’s intent on what theDepartment and its partners must accomplish during this year. The Secretary’s guidance drivesthe development of the Department’s Strategic Plan, which depicts how the Department willachieve these initiatives, when they will be accomplished and the metrics used to measureprogress.Major Accomplishments in 2007Over the past year the professional and caring people of the Department of Children andFamilies along with our partners have achieved much. Before we identify key initiatives for2008, it’s important to reflect on some of these major accomplishments. (See Appendix A for amore detailed list of accomplishments.)DEPARTMENT• Implemented various cultural change initiatives; Secretary’s Six Guiding Principles,Common Sense and Sense of Urgency; Transparency and Open Government; and PlainLanguage.• Reorganized the Department by establishing Regions and Circuits, restructuring DCF LegalServices, and adding a Criminal Justice Director and Regional Criminal Justice Coordinators.MENTAL HEALTH / SUBSTANCE ABUSE• Reduced the adult forensic wait list to zero• Expanded competency restoration services both in-jail and in the community• Eliminated the Juvenile Incompetent to Proceed waiting list for community competencyservicesCHILD WELFARE• Finalized 3,229 adoptions• Promulgated written Rights of Foster Care Children• Refocused Department attention on prevention• Implemented Florida’s child abuse prevention (IV-E) waiverACCESS• Won the Innovation in Government Award• Significantly reduced the Food Stamp error rate• Redesigned Call Centers______________________________________________________________________________1 Updated January 17, 2008

Governor’s IntentGovernor Crist’s leadership has established an environment in which his administration willserve the people. The Governor has pledged to “establish an ethical and hard workingadministration that will reflect Florida’s diversity, that will listen to your ideas, and that willfight for you, the people of Florida.” Governor Crist firmly believes that leaders inadministration demonstrate integrity and “work hard with me everyday to provide hope, safety,and opportunity for every Floridian.”Governor Crist has provided guidance to the Department through public statements, ExecutiveOrders, the General Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2007-08, and in conversations with theSecretary. The key Executive Orders and Budget are summarized below. The Department willcontinue to implement the tasks specified in these documents during 2008.EXECUTIVE ORDERS1. Executive Order 07-01: Continue to implement Code of Ethics, Plain Language andCustomer Services tasks as outlined in Executive Order 07-01. See Appendix B for tasks.2. Executive Order 07-126: Continue to implement actions to reduce greenhouse gasemissions as delineated in Executive Order 07-126.BUDGET SUMMARY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007-08: Continue to implement tasksassociated with the Fiscal Year 2007-2008 budget. See Appendix C for a more detailed listing oftasks.______________________________________________________________________________DCF Mission Protect the vulnerable Promote strong and economically self-sufficient families Advance personal and family recovery and resiliency______________________________________________________________________________2 Updated January 17, 2008

Secretary’s GuidanceThe Department of Children and Families serves the most vulnerable people and families inFlorida. We must constantly keep our focus on these needy Floridians. Whether it’s an abusedchild or vulnerable adult who needs to be protected, a homeless veteran who needs a place tolive, a single mother who needs welfare assistance to feed her children, a parent with a substanceabuse problem who needs treatment, a person with a mental illness who needs medication, orother needy people who rely on our services; when these Floridians need our services, they needthem NOW. Therefore, during 2008 we shall streamline our processes and deliver services tocustomers quicker. We will embrace a sense of urgency in all that we do.Not only do our customers need services quicker, many of them require more than one service toaddress their needs. However, in the past, the Department frequently thought about anddelivered services from a single-program perspective. We can no longer do work this way. Ourcustomers need services provided in an integrated and complementary approach. So, we shallintegrate child welfare, domestic violence, substance abuse, mental health, homelessness, andother services provided by the Department into both the development of policy and delivery ofservices. This year we must refocus our efforts to integrate Substance Abuse and Mental HealthServices into local Circuit operations.We shall broaden the use of common sense throughout the Department, including our partners,contractors and stakeholders. During 2008, we must aggressively reduce regulatory andadministrative burdens on the public, our partners and staff. Additionally, we shall continue toassure compliance with the Plain Language Initiative so our correspondence with the public isclear and concise.An important feature of common sense government is customer service. As we mentionedabove, serving vulnerable people and families is why the Department exists. Therefore, we shallprovide extraordinary customer service to these needy people. To this end we will ask customersto determine how they define good service; develop, publish and distribute customer servicestandards; survey customers to find out how well we are living up to those standards and useresponses to improve service; and compare operations and results to “world-class” organizations.Last year was a noteworthy year for the Department. We shall continue to build on our effortsfrom 2007 in gaining and maintaining the public’s trust and confidence. Every action we take,every service we deliver, and every impression we make has the potential to increase or decreasepeople’s perception of both our competence, and the efficiency and effectiveness in which theDepartment delivers services.In 2007 we will continue to gain the public’s trust by –• Demonstrating that we are building an action-oriented agency focused on helpingcommunities pursue opportunities and resolve issues;• broadening the public’s knowledge of the program and services provided by the Department;3 Updated January 17, 2008

• improving accountability by developing meaningful performance measures, focusing onpriority outcomes, enhancing quality assurance, and increasing local control of operations.To maintain the trust of the people they must believe we are open and transparent. This year weshall continue to educate the leadership of the Department to assure full and expeditiouscompliance with Florida’s open government and public records laws. We shall also seeklegislative changes to further make the Department more open and transparent.Finally, we must change the Department’s governance model to align with one of our keyprinciples – pushing decisions to the lowest appropriate level. Department field staff along withour partners have extensive knowledge on how to deliver efficient and effective services. Wemust tap into this expertise. Therefore, we shall increase the use of workgroups, teams, etc. withrepresentation from the field to implement a “push up” model of policy development.Workforce . . .______________________________________________________________________________Key Department InitiativesThe Secretary has determined that the successful execution of the initiatives outlined below iscritical to the overall success of the Department. Therefore the Secretary will be personallyinvolved in planning, implementing and overseeing these key strategic areas.Actions to protect the vulnerableCHILD WELFARE1. Independent Living: Enable children in foster care and young adults who wereformerly in foster care to develop the skills necessary for successful transition toadulthood and self-sufficiency.(a) Increase the number of youth graduating from high school and post-secondary education.(1) Increase the educational stability of children in foster care by increasing the numberof foster children remaining in their same school, when feasible, or improve thetransition between schools and school districts when school moves occur.(2) Facilitate youth having supports to enter into, and complete high school and postsecondaryeducation.(3) Balance Road to Independence stipends with the number of young adult seeking postsecondaryeducation.4 Updated January 17, 2008

(b) Enhance opportunities and supports for youth to fully participate in all aspects of theprimary and secondary school experience as well as activities to enhance normalcy.(c) Increase the number of youth who obtain a job that provides a living wage byimplementing “Operation Full Employment” to employ 100 youth in foster care in theDepartment; and challenging statewide employer / agency collaborations that help firsttimeworkers enter and advance in the workplace.(d) Continue to support the development and implementation of a transitional living orsubsidized independent living housing experience for those youth aging out of foster careat age 17 who will not have the option of remaining in a foster care family home or grouphome.(e) Support the development of transitional housing programs and scattered site apartmentswith support services for youth ages 18-23.(f) Continue to establish and implement measureable outcome measures for youth aging outof foster care focusing on education, employment, housing, financial stability, andpermanency.(g) Improve the consistency of services’ provision throughout Florida by establishing clearIndependent Living Services policies, procedures and standards of service; and insuringthat life skills trainings, education planning, career path development, financial literacytraining and other services are of the same quality regardless of the placement of theyouth in Florida.(h) Increase youth involvement in developing all aspects of their case plans.(i) Implement the Independent Living Services Advisory Council’s 2007 Report ofIndependent Living Services for Florida’s Foster Youth.2. Foster Care: Decrease the time for a child in foster care to achieve permanency.(a) Increase in-home intervention and support so that more children can remain safely intheir homes rather than enter out-of-home care.(b) Reduce the time of reunifications for foster children who are placed in and outside ofFlorida: Interstate Compact for the Placement of Children (ICPC).(c) Improve the permanency of reunifications.(d) Improve the timeliness of adoptions.(e) Decrease the number of children discharged from foster care due to emancipation orreaching their 18 th birthday.5 Updated January 17, 2008

3. Foster Care: Improve the stability of children in foster care.(a) Reduce the number of placement settings that a child will have in foster care.(b) Decrease the number of schools that a child in foster care attends.4. Foster Care: Improve key aspects of child well-being and safety in the foster caresystem.(a) Engage the family, especially the father, in determining a child’s well-being.(b) Improve the use of professional assessment information case plans and providingservices.(c) Increase a child’s access to services focusing on pre-pay mental health plans.(d) Stabilize the workforce in child welfare.(e) Improve in-service training.5. Adoptions: Adopt a minimum of 2,751 children.(a) Support the Governor’s Office of Adoption and Child Abuse Protection’s initiativesencouraging the adoption of Florida’s children in foster care and supporting a statewidepublic service campaign to let all Floridians know the value of adoption and how it canpromote a culture of life in our state.(b) Increase adoptions of African-American children by enhancing the One Church OneChild initiative.6. Child Safety: Reduce the number of child deaths in Florida.(a) In coordination with the Department of Health and other organizations, educate thepublic to the dangers of the most likely causes of child deaths.(b) In coordination with the Department of Health and other organizations, educatemandatory reporters to the behaviors associated with perpetrators of child abuse.7. Child Safety: Increase the use of technology to improve child safety.8. Child Safety: Implement the approved recommendations from the Child ProtectionTask Force and Courtney Clark Quality Assurance Reports.6 Updated January 17, 2008

9. Children’s Legal Services: Create a professional law firm within the Department.(a) Build a Children’s Legal Services leadership team.(b) Improve the image Judges have of Children’s Legal Services’ lawyers; competent/goodlitigators, child-focused, well-prepared, professional, and collaborative.(c) Adopt the “prosecutor” model for legal representation in the child welfare system.Actions to promote strong and economically self-sufficient familiesHOMELESSNESS10. Reduce homelessness among at-risk families and vulnerable adults.(a) Educate the public on homelessness.(b) Increase affordable housing for persons with mental illness, young adults transitioningout of foster care, and veterans.(c) Target veterans who are homeless or at-risk of being homeless with Department services(mental health, substance abuse, domestic violence, etc.).(d) Assist low income individuals and families to remain in their homes.(e) Enhance the capacity of the Office on Homelessness.ACCESS11. Public Assistance: Decrease the time required for eligible families to receive benefits.(a) Expedite the processing of food stamps requests.(b) Provide access to benefits for families eligible for expedited food stamps within 24 hours.(c) Distribute work statewide: use technology to move work where production is moreeffective and efficient.12. Public Assistance: Continue to reduce the food stamp error rate not only avoidingfederal penalty but putting Florida in position to qualify for federal bonus funding.13. Increase access to health insurance.7 Updated January 17, 2008

(a) Through multi-agency action, increase the number of eligible children enrolled inKidcare through Medicaid or Healthy Kids.(b) Reduce the adverse impact of federal administrative requirements on enrollment ofeligible children and adults in Medicaid.Actions to advance personal and family recovery and resiliencyMENTAL HEALTH / SUBSTANCE ABUSE14. Adult Forensics: Maintain the adult forensic 15-day waiting list at zero.15. Juvenile Forensics: Eliminate the Juvenile Incompetent to Proceed wait lists.16. Mental Health System: Implement the approved recommendations from the SteeringCommittee on Families and Children in the Court Report.17. Mental Health System: Evaluate managing entities as a service delivery system in all orselected Department regions.18. Co-occurring Disorders: Assist Department-funded providers of Substance Abuse andMental Health in becoming dually-diagnosed capable.REFUGEE SERVICES19. Implement approved recommendations from the Refugee Services Working Group.ADULT SERVICES20. Implement approved recommendations from the Adult Services Task Force.21. Streamline and improve interagency processes to establish a single entry point toMedicaid Waiver programs for eligible disabled adults.Areas of Risk8 Updated January 17, 2008

Appendices9 Updated January 17, 2008

This page intentionally left blank10 Updated January 17, 2008

APPENDIX A: Department of Children and Families 2007 AccomplishmentsGovernor and Secretary Directives1. Implemented Culture Change Initiatives:(a) Secretary’s Six guiding Principles(b) Common Sense / Sense of Urgency(c) Transparency and Open Government(d) Plain Language2. Reorganized Department:(a) Established Regions and Circuit-based delivery of services(b) Restructured DCF Legal Services (Statewide law firm)(c) Added Criminal Justice Director and Region Criminal Justice Coordinators3. Established Task Force for Child Protection:(a) Published preliminary report that includes initial recommendations(b) Assigned workgroups to monitor, implement, and make further recommendations4. Established Adult Protective Services Advisory Panel5. Launched One Church One Child pilot in Hillsborough and Duval counties to promoteadoptions.6. Granted access for investigators to National Crime and Information Center7. Finalized 3,229 Adoptions during the calendar year8. Changed the Department’s legal philosophy regarding lawsuits9. Played an active role in the development and implementation of the Children and YouthCabinet10. Promulgated written Rights of Foster Care Children11. Refocused Departmental attention on prevention12. Focused Legislative Budget Requests on the real Departmental needs11 Updated January 17, 2008

13. Assured credibility of budget reduction preparatory efforts14. Increased interaction with and involvement of advocates with Departmental initiatives15. Launched the Department’s Leadership Institute which provides a structure for thesystematic development of leadership talent and serves as a change agent Department-wide(a) Implemented the Florida Youth Leadership Academy as the result of a Child WelfareLeadership class project(b) Initiated three levels of leadership development Executive Leadership (24 participants);Managing for Excellence/Certified Public Manager (172 participants); and Supervisingfor Excellence (330 participants)ACCESS1. Boosted KidCare enrollment statewide by 30% during the first six months of FY 2007compared to the same time period in FY 20062. Redesigned Call Centers3. Implemented statewide electronic/paperless case file system, using document imagingtechnology4. Reduced the Food Stamp error rate5. Enhance the focus on quality of life6. Won the Government Innovations Award7. Developed plans for pilot projects in Duval and Broward Counties to reinstate Medicaideligibility of prisoners receiving medications for mental illness prior to their releaseMental Health1. Reduced Forensic Waiting List to zero by May 2007. Progress has been sustained:(a) Expanded competency restoration services both in-jail and in the community(b) Expanded Comprehensive Community Service Teams(c) Opened 318 designated forensic treatment facility beds and 70 community forensic beds(d) Established additional Mental Health Courts in several areas throughout the state12 Updated January 17, 2008

2. Eliminated the JITP (Juvenile Incompetent to Proceed) waiting list for communitycompetency services while managing number of children on the waiting list for secureprograms despite increases3. Development of the Transforming Florida’s Mental Health System Report4. Expanded the Crisis Intervention Team training in Northwest Florida5. Began the process to require substance abuse/mental health providers to be dually-diagnosedcapable6. Renewed evaluation of the role of managing entities in providing substance abuse/mentalhealth services7. Resolved maintenance of effort inquiry from SAMHSAChild Welfare1. Implement Florida’s child abuse prevention (IV-E) waiver, effective October 20062. Launched first phase of Florida Safe Families Network (FSFN)3. Transitioned Citrus County Child Protective Investigations to the Sheriff’s Office on July 1,20074. Conducted youth aging-out-foster-care survey5. Amended childcare licensing rules6. Began the Home for the Holidays initiative7. Increased emphasis on CBC performance measures, outcomes, and accountability8. Began shifting the organizational culture toward keeping children in the home and onsupporting families9. Granted access to FLORIDA System to protective investigators13 Updated January 17, 2008

10. Conducted the Annual Dependency Summit11. Conducted a detailed review of the Courtney Clark case and implemented a number ofsystem enhancements12. Established housing in Broward County for youth aging-out of foster care13. Implemented quarterly Regional Family Safety events14. Instituted a number of CBC grant activities, such as the DCF/KCI Demonstration Project forQuality Assurance and Performance-Based Contracting15. Implemented a number of mediation projects throughout the State and, at the DependencySummit, recognized former Governor MacKay for his leadership role in these effortsHomelessness: Awarded grants of $1,1 million to build housing units in Jacksonville and Tampaspecifically for Independent Living Youth to occupy.Refugee Programs: Received $453,600 in general revenue funding to contract for thedevelopment of training materials for child protective investigators on the recognition of andservices available to human trafficking victimsRelationships1. Engaged Board Chairs and Chief Executive Officers of the Community Based Care LeadAgencies in active meetings and dialogue2. Worked on enhancing relationships and communications with other social service agencies,including the Department of Juvenile Justice, the Agency for Persons with Disabilities, theAgency for Health Care Administration, and the Department of Health, regarding theresponse to and placement of children3. Focused on enhancing relationships with the criminal justice system, including the courts,state attorneys, and public defenders4. Expanded the Department’s efforts at public recognition14 Updated January 17, 2008

APPENDIX B: Governor’s Executive Orders1. Executive Order 07-01(a) Code of Ethics(1) Continue to train employees on the subjects of ethics, public records, open meetings,records retention, equal opportunity and proper personnel procedures annually.(2) Continue to assure that the Department maintains and effectively enforces the highestethical standards for state officials and employees, and promotes consistency of Stateagency policies on ethics, public records, open meetings, and personnel matters.(b) Plain Language: Assure continued compliance with the Plain Language Initiative toensure that announcements, publications, and other documents sent by the Departmentcontain clear and concise instructions and information.(c) Customer Service: Continue to review of how each of the Department’s employees canbetter serve the people. The purpose of the review shall be to: install performance-basedincentives to improve service; install best practices relating to customer service; enhanceprocedures for soliciting, receiving and managing new ideas and from the people we serve;and put in place a world-class training and review program to ensure that our publicemployees maintain their focus on service.2. Executive Order 07-126: Immediate Actions to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions FromFlorida State Government.(a) Do not enter into new leasing agreements for office space that does not meet Energy Starbuilding standards, except when certified by the Secretary that no other viable alternativeexists.(b) Be prepared to implement energy conservation measures and guidelines developed by theDepartment of Management Services (DMS) for new and existing office space where theDepartment occupies more than 20,000 square feet.(c) Effective January 1, 2008, do not contract for meeting and conference space with hotelsor conference facilities that have not received the “Green Lodging” certification, exceptwhen certified to the Governor by the Secretary that no other viable alternative exists.(d) Continue assure that all vehicles are meeting minimum maintenance schedules shown toreduce fuel consumption.(e) Use ethanol and biodiesel fuels when locally available.15 Updated January 17, 2008

APPENDIX C: Governor’s Highlights of Fiscal Year 2007-2008 Budget for the Department1. Mental Health and Substance Abuse Programs(a) Forensic Mental Health Program – Annualize 353 additional secure and step-down bedsto eliminate the forensic wait list.(b) Juvenile Incompetent to Proceed – Reduce the wait list for competency restorationservices to 73 juveniles.(c) South Florida Evaluation and Treatment Center Bed Capacity – Operate the expandedbed capacity approved in FY 2006-2007 for South Florida Evaluation and TreatmentCenter.(d) Public Safety, Mental Health and Substance Abuse Local Matching Grants – Expand oradd services that promote jail diversion by focusing on individuals with serious mentalillness or substance abuse disorder.(e) Outpatient Baker Act Pilot Program – Develop community mental health services topromote the use of outpatient treatment services in lieu of more costly inpatienttreatment.2. Family Safety Program(a) Healthy Families Program Expansion – Expand the prevention services to the fourteencounties that not currently being served by the Healthy Families Program.(b) Child Protective Investigations – Citrus County Sheriff to assume full responsibility forchild abuse investigations.(c) Independent Living Program – Fund Road to Independence aftercare and transitionstipends to youths age 18 and over who are phasing out of foster care.(d) Community-Based Care Equity – Provides additional funding to achieve a more equitabledistribution of child protection resources among community based care lead agencies.(e) State Automated Child Welfare Information System (SACWIS) – Provides funds tocontinue development of the SACWIS project by a system integrator.3. Domestic Violence Program: Domestic Violence Awareness and Education – Preventdomestic violence.4. Refugee Services Program: Immigrant Survivors of Human Trafficking – Pay for basicbenefits such as food and medical care for survivors of human trafficking until they aredetermined eligible for federal benefits.16 Updated January 17, 2008

APPENDIX D: Department’s 2008 Legislative Package1. Complete Organizational Redesign. Proposal will complete the process of organizationalredesign that began in the 2007 session. The proposal will amend Chapter 20.19, F. S. toalign the Department's regions and circuits with the recommendations of the Department'sworkgroup that were approved by the Secretary. The proposal will also incorporate otherstatutory changes consistent with the comprehensive recommendations of the workgroup.2. Comprehensive Reform of Child Protection. On August 3, a Task Force on ChildProtection, appointed by Secretary Butterworth began work on a comprehensive review ofchild welfare in Florida. The following series of proposals are among the issues the taskforce will review.• Dependency Proceedings and Non-Offending Parents. This proposal will facilitatemore rapid attainment of permanency in dependency or termination of parental rightsproceedings where one parent is responsible for the abuse, neglect, or abandonment, andthe other parent in not part of the household and can provide an appropriate and safeplacement for the child(ren).• Child-on-Child Investigations. This proposal changes the statute in Chapter 39 forchild-on-child investigations. The use of term "alleged juvenile sexual offender" todescribe toddlers and young children under a service referral for treatment and servicesdue to an alleged sexual act, is not appropriate. The proposal changes the statute todescribe these dependency service referrals, and the label to these children as “child withsexual behavior problem” versus the term “alleged juvenile sexual offender”. The courtsshould be left with labeling children and adults as sex offenders not child protectiveinvestigators.• Exceptions to 60 Day Closure Requirement. This proposal would provide specificexceptions to the 60 Day Closure requirement in cases related to child deaths, missingchildren and criminal prosecutions.• Background Screening Requirements. This proposal would align provisions related tobackground screening requirements for relatives, non-relatives, foster parents, and otherpotential caregivers.• Non-Relative Placements. Clarify requirements for judicial approval of non-relativecare placements, to include limitations on placement based on age of child and permanentguardianship or foster care licensure expectations (ss. 39.401, 409.175, and 39.0138,F.S.)• Notice of Proceedings. Clarify that notice of proceedings pursuant to s. 39.502, F.S. toinclude verbal and written notice to foster and pre-adoptive parents.17 Updated January 17, 2008

• Strengthen Child Welfare Injunction Provision. Amend Section 39.504, F.S. (childwelfare injunction statute) to strengthen its provisions so that it is more useful for childwelfare cases when domestic violence is involved. This is a program integration effortthat will result in more effective working relationships between child welfare workersand domestic violence advocates, as well as, potentially increase both child and adultsafety. Due to the limitations of the current injunction language, child welfare workersoften tell a domestic violence victim that they need to get a 741 injunction. This proposalwould address those limitations.• Exceptions to Pre-Disposition Studies. Propose exceptions to the required filing of thePre-disposition Study that enables judicial determination for waiver upon determinationthat a court case record contains all information located in companion documents thatreplicates PDS requirements for informed decision-making.• Child Location Reports. Require law enforcement to take missing child reports fromDCF and the CBC's and require the Department to maintain open investigations ofspecified child deaths and missing children cases.• Guardianship Procedures for Vulnerable Children. Establish a clear procedure forappointing a guardian for vulnerable children receiving services from the State of Floridato ensure access to appropriate Medicaid and Agency for Persons with Disabilities (APD)services.• Interstate Compact for the Placement of Children (ICPC). The proposed changes toChapter 409, F.S. are: (1) Addition of definitions for “timely interstate home study”;“home evaluation”; “full home studies”; (2) Time frames for ensuring for ensuring thathomes studies are expeditiously completed and thoroughly evaluated the homeenvironment of in terms of safety and well-being of the child(ren) to be placed; and (3)Include rulemaking authority to establish processes, procedures for implementation of thestatutes related to ICPC to effectuate timely processing of home studies.• Statutory Authority for Lead Agency Failures. This proposal would amend section409.1671, Florida Statutes, to: (1) Provide for alternatives for addressing potential leadagency failures other than receivership, which is now the only option in statute thatallows the Department to direct the operations of a failing CBC; and (2) Strengthen andadd progressive intervention language to statutory authority.• Outsourcing of Programmatic and Financial Monitoring. This proposal wouldaddress inconsistencies in current statute regarding outsourcing of programmatic andfinancial monitoring and clarify that the Department is responsible for the integrity of allaspects of the monitoring process. This amendment would also clarify the responsibilityof the Department to require corrective action identified as needed by an independentmonitor.18 Updated January 17, 2008

• Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles (DHSMV) Data Access. Addlanguage to s.322.142(4),FS to allow the Family Safety Program to access pictures andsignatures in DHSMV database (DAVE) for purposes of identifying persons with regardto protective investigations.• Child Care Training Exemptions. Align the training requirements of family day carehome and large family child care home operators with those of child facility personnel.• Recruitment. This proposal would provide an incentive for retiring law enforcementpersonnel to transition into protective investigation positions by waiving the requirementthat retirees leave state services for 12 months before being allowed to work and drawretirement. Requisite educational and pre-service certification mandates remain.• Recruitment and Retention. Authorize a Student Loan Reimbursement Program to beused for recruitment and retention of Child Welfare employees in the Department ofChildren and Families and Community Based Care lead agencies.3. Mental Health and Substance Abuse Reform. The Secretary has appointed the AssistantSecretary for Substance Abuse and Mental Health to coordinate with Judge Steven Leifman.Judge Leifman has been appointed by the Chief Justice to serve as a Special Advisor onCriminal Justice and Mental Health. The following proposals will be coordinated with thework that Judge Leifman is coordinating.• Mental Health and Criminal Justice Systems Alignment. Proposes alignment ofmental health service delivery system with criminal justice initiatives includinginfrastructure investment, and realignment; identifies policies to suspend entitlementsupon incarceration with reinstatement immediately upon release; establishes statewidestandards for screening, evaluation, and discharge planning; requires judges, casemanagers, and guardian ad litems to receive medication and mental health training;reorganizes current juvenile competency restoration program; requires comprehensiveand periodic evaluation of all children; emphasizes prevention, comprehensive care, andseamless movement of children at risk or involved in the criminal justice system as theyare involved with mental health services; recommends financing strategies, forensicmental health procedures, performance outcomes, and workforce issues; and proposes aninteragency task force to develop strategies for implementation of the concepts.• Forensic Examiner Registry: This proposal revises ss 916.111, F.S., which pertains tomental health experts who are employed to conduct evaluations of defendants forcompetency to proceed or for sanity at the time of the commission of an offense. Theproposal further clarified the Department's role in the training of such experts and therecommended standardization of their evaluations.• Timely Transport and Hearings for Forensic Residents: The proposed addition toChapter 916, F.S., establishes the time frame for an individual to be returned to jail and19 Updated January 17, 2008

have a hearing scheduled when restoration of competency is reported to the court, or thecourt is notified that an individual no longer meets commitment criteria.• Placement and Treatment of Department of Corrections Inmates: This proposedchange to Chapter 916, F.S., would clarify that the Department of Corrections (DC) isresponsible for providing treatment and/or training to DC inmates who are determinedincompetent to proceed or not guilty by reason of insanity on new charges applied sinceadmission to the DC facility, and DC inmates who have been sentenced to death and aredetermined to be mentally incompetent pursuant to Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure3.851(g).• Secure Mental Health Treatment Facilities: Provides for department enforcement ofthe building code relating to the construction of secure mental health facilities, consistentwith juvenile justice and corrections facilities.• Stakeholder Recommendations. The proposal amends Chapter 394 to align languageon provider accreditation in Chapter 397. Changes to Chapter 397 are recommendationsfrom the Department and stakeholders to standardize definitions concerning substanceabuse treatment using the Treatment Improvement Protocols published nationally; todefine substance abuse medication treatments in addition to methadone detoxification andmaintenance services; to revise licensing from locations to programs which will reduceoverall licenses by 25%; and to identify ways to provide administrative relief to enhancethe quantity and quality of treatment services.• Part IV Chapter 394, F.S. Revision. This proposal amends Part IV, Chapter 394,Florida Statutes to authorize the Department to formally enroll persons who meet clinicaland financial eligibility criteria that currently exists. This change better aligns thepopulation served by the Department with those served by the Agency for Health CareAdministration through MEDICAID funding. Currently, there are significant overlapswhich results in providers billing the Department for clients who are MEDICAIDeligible. The proposal also strengthens the enrollment process which will result in betteraccountability, treatment placements, and determination of financial eligibility. TheDepartment will have a defined treatment population to serve which will not lessen thecurrent capability.4. Improved Coordination Among Agencies. The following proposals would improvecoordination among agencies and improve services to citizens.• Criminal and Juvenile Justice Information Systems Council. This proposal wouldamend sec. 943.06, F.S. and sec. 943.08, F.S. to add the Secretary of the Department ofChildren and Families or designee to the Criminal and Juvenile Justice InformationSystems Council.• Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Data (DHSMV). Amend322.142(4), F.S., to allow Department staff access to the driver image and signature data20 Updated January 17, 2008

managed by the DHSMV for the purpose of establishing ACCESS Program eligibility.The Medicaid and Food Stamp Programs require proof of identity as a factor ofeligibility. Additionally, the Medicaid Program requires proof of citizenship as a factorof eligibility. DHSMV requires applicants for a driver’s license and a state issuedidentification card verify citizenship (or lawful non-citizen status). Therefore, a driver’slicense or a state issued identification card may be used to meet the requirement of theMedicaid and Food Stamp Programs. Electronic access to the driver’s license image andsignature will shorten the time it takes to determine eligibility.5. Adult Protection• Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles (DHSMV) Data. Amend s.322.142(4). F.S., to allow the Department (Adult Services) access to the driver image andsignature data in the DHSMV database (DAVE) for the purpose of establishing theindividual's identity with regard to adult protective investigations.• Repeal of Fee. OPPAGA recommended in FY 2003-04, that the fee for services for theCommunity Care for Disabled Adult program be repealed due to the low income status ofindividuals being served by this program.• Rule Making Authority for Adult Protective Services. The current statute containsgeneral rule development authority in s. 415.112, F.S. There is no current statutorylanguage for specific rule development. Specific rule development authority is need forthe efficient and effective management of all programs and functions necessary forimplementing the Adult Protective Services Program.• Community Care for Disabled Adults (Priority for services). With the divestiture ofprograms from the department, Section 410.604(2), F.S. should be amended to clarify theprovisions regarding “priority” of service provision.• Initiation of Guardianship Proceedings for Incapacitated Adults: Establish thedepartment's authority to initiate a petition for determination of incapacity and/or apetition for guardianship in those cases where the provision of temporary services underchapter 415, Florida Statutes, will not adequately ensure a client's safety. The proposedlanguage will clarify that the department and department employees cannot be appointedas guardian, and will otherwise define the limits of department involvement in theguardianship proceeding.• Merge Homeless Prevention Grants. There is a great and continually increasingdemand for homeless prevention services across the state of Florida. In the 2006-2007fiscal year, the Department received over 16,500 applications from families with minorchildren facing eviction. The existing statewide prevention program is administeredwithout linkage to local resources. To maximize assistance and avoid duplication ofservice to the growing number of Florida families in need, it is proposed that two existingfunding sources (the federal emergency shelter grant and the state emergency housing21 Updated January 17, 2008

program) be combined into one locally administered homeless prevention grant. Noadditional funding would be necessary to implement the new program and there would bea savings of $200,000 or more per year in state administrative costs. This proposal wouldrequire revision of the authorizing statute in Section 414.16 to convert the stateadministered direct assistance program into a local grant program.• Summary Guardianship Proceedings for the Mentally Ill: Amendment to F.S. 394Mental Health Statute to incorporate summary guardianship proceedings for the mentallyill, in order to (1) expand beyond the temporary, intermittent and under used provisionsof the existing guardian advocacy provisions, to (2) eliminate or reduce the costs(attorney and filing fees and procedural costs) and the rigorous reporting requirements offormal guardianship for this sector of the population, which is faced with indigency,burgeoning treatment needs, an incapacity to understand those needs and a dearth ofagencies and individuals who are willing to assist the mentally ill in meeting their specialneeds for education, medical, and mental health treatment, application for governmentbenefits, and management of their benefits.6. Commission on Open Government. Statutory revisions necessary to implement therecommendation of the Commission on Open Government.• Facilitate Release of Child Abuse Investigation Records. Allows for public release ofchild abuse investigation records where abuse, neglect, or abandonment has beenverified. The amendment would require that information that would identify the victimor any other minor named in the report to remain confidential.• Release of Records to Former Foster Care Clients. Provides a clear process forformer foster care clients to follow when denied access to their own records.• Sharing information with Community-Based Care Agencies. Clarifies that CBC's andtheir subcontracted providers are to have access to records relating investigation of childabuse, abandonment, and neglect and to ensure that CBC's and their subcontractors sharethese records with any other individual who is entitled to access.• Facilitate Release of Adult Abuse Investigation Records. Gives the Departmentgreater authority to release adult investigation records where abuse, neglect, orabandonment has been verified.• Release of Records to Adult Services Clients and/or their Guardian, Caregiver, orLegal Council. Provides a clear process for vulnerable adults, and/or their guardian,caregiver, or legal counsel to follow when denied access to their own records.• Information-Sharing Between Agencies. Creates a general law relating to informationsharingbetween agencies.22 Updated January 17, 2008

APPENDIX E: Legislative Budget Request for Fiscal Year 2008 - 20091. Critical NeedsINDEPENDENT LIVING SERVICES PROGRAM WORKLOADINCREASE$16,829,507$14.3 million for 18-23 year olds• Road to Independence payments• Transition services• Aftercare services• Staff to provide case coordination and support$2.5 million for 13-17 year olds for additional staff to ensure that assessmentsare completed and appropriate services providedYOUTH AGING OUT – FOSTER CARE HOUSING ASSISTANCE• Current year Homeless Housing Assistance grants received close to $3million in applications for this population but we were only able to awardless than $1 million.MAINTENANCE ADOPTION SUBSIDIES$2,000,000$14,993,681• To continue new subsidies at new annual amount appropriated by theLegislature in prior year and to allow some funds for increase to existingsubsidies for increased needs.TECHNOLOGY TO DOCUMENT VISITS WITH CHILD AND ADULTVICTIMS$1,711,432• This is a technology issue to better document visits with children and toensure that information is available more quickly.ACCESS FLORIDA PROGRAM INCREASE IN DIRECT CLIENTSERVICES – ELIGIBILITY DETERMINATION WORKLOAD$12,669,922• 300 full time equivalent (FTE) positions and the reclassification of 78clerical positions to support the workload associated with the increasednumber of applicants. Since Fiscal Year 2002-2003, the number of eligibleclients increased more than 16% and the number of applications processedincreased more than 34%. Total number of direct services staff has beenreduced by more than 43%.23 Updated January 17, 2008

CHILDREN’S MENTAL HEALTH JUVENILE INCOMPETENT TOPROCEED – SECURE ADDITIONAL BEDS$3,577,680• Increase the capacity of the Juvenile Incompetent to Proceed (JITP) secureresidential treatment program by 24 beds in order to help eliminate thecurrent waiting list. The Department is required by Section 985.19, F.S., toprovide competency training in a secure residential facility for juvenilescharged with a felony and found incompetent to proceed due to mentalillness, mental retardation, or autism.CHILDREN’S MENTAL HEALTH JUVENILE INCOMPETENT TOPROCEED – COMMUNITY-BASED PROGRAM$110,560• To eliminate the community waitlist for competency restoration services.Current waitlist is zero as a result of funds appropriated last year, but weneed these funds to ensure that we remain there.VIOLENT SEXUAL PREDATOR PROGRAM• $1,939,001 for operations of the facility• $300,000 for litigation costs• $1,464,383 for file review, file screening, evaluation, and recordsmanagement functions.• $600,000 for Utility Costs• $25,000 for the DeSoto County Jail for the cost of medications for FCCCresidents while being held in custody.DEMONSTRATION PROJECT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OFHOUSING ADVOCATES FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE VICTIMS$4,328,384$500,000• This is a recommendation from the statewide needs assessment to establish“housing advocates” to serve the clients of the certified domestic violencecenters in the project areas by both identifying and developing affordablehousing resources. Two areas of the state, one rural and one urban, will beidentified for this pilot.24 Updated January 17, 2008

2. Other Department PrioritiesMENTAL HEALTH/CRIMINAL JUSTICE• Adult Mental Health Housing Rental Supplement Program• Adult Mental Health Criminal Justice Re-Entry Aftercare Support• Adult Mental Health Community Based Intervention Expansion andDevelopment• Florida Assertive Community Treatment (FACT) Expansion• Florida Sequential Intercept and Redirection Program$14,418,720$3,464,227$3,325,000$3,129,675$21,620,000CHILD WELFARE• Workforce Investment to Reduce Caseload, Turnover, and to EnhancePermanency, Safety, and Well-Being• Rate Increase for the Relative Caregiver Program• Children's Mental Health Community Action Teams• Substance Abuse Treatment Access For Child Welfare Clients• Child Welfare Legal Services Workload• Children's Mental Health Intensive Prevention/Early Intervention Services• Child Welfare Employees Advanced Training And Instruction• Post Adoption Stabilization Services• Increased Adoption Benefits for State Employees• Children's Mental Health Early Childhood Consultation• One Church One Child• Increase Child Welfare Practice Oversight And Technical Assistance$16,592,500$9,579,492$5,550,000$5,450,720$4,654,675$2,275,840$1,483,420$1,375,000$585,285$222,479$150,000$100,29025 Updated January 17, 2008

ADULT SERVICES• Reduce Waitlists- Disabled Adults home and community based,community care for the disabled, and home care for the disabled• Adult Protective Investigators Workload Increase• Victims Of Human Trafficking - Detection And Education Initiative• Adult Protection Quality Assurance• Adult Protection Home And Community Based Services WaiverUtilization Review$4,999,276$4,813,128$1,513,836$377,701$341,500SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH• Infrastructure Development For Co-occurring Disorders And MedicationAssisted Therapies• Enhanced Security Staff For Forensic Mental Health Treatment Facilities• Special Risk Retirement• Adult Mental Health Orange County Central Receiving Center System• Adult Mental Health Self-directed Care Expansion• Children's Mental Health Juvenile Incompetent To Proceed Secure PerDiem Rate Increase• Establish Circuit Peer Specialist Positions For Mental Health• Convert Other Personal Services (OPS) Staff Within The Mental HealthProgram To Full Time Equivalents (FTEs)• Adult Mental Health Preadmission Screening And Resident ReviewWorkload Increase• Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders (fasd) Resource And NetworkingCenter5,767,044$4,957,047$3,121,209$3,000,000$2,370,140$2,032,320$1,178,629$769,871$317,250$239,66326 Updated January 17, 2008

WORKLOAD INCREASE ISSUES• Sheriff Workload Increase• Florida Abuse Hotline Counselor Reports Workload• Emergency Financial Assistance For Housing Workload• Florida Abuse Hotline Crime Intelligence Unit Workload• Background Screening Workload Increase• Establish Positions To Address Workload Increase for The Office ofAppeals Hearings• Training In The Office of The General Counsel And DistrictAdministration And Increase To Base Rate Of Pay For Paralegal Staff• Voluntary Pre-Kindergarten Workload Increase• Enhance role of attorneys in procurement, negotiation, and review ofcontracts• Child Care Licensing Workload$6,667,296$1,654,149$1,304,094$891,966$323,091$316,466$209,052$116,348$509,117$1,003,174ACCESS• Automated Community Connection To Economic Self-sufficiencyIncrease To The Base Rate Of Pay For Eligibility Staff$5,800,27127 Updated January 17, 2008

NON-RECURRING ISSUES• Expansion Of Services For Community Mental Health• Maintenance And Repair (Fixed Capital Outlay)• ACCESS Technology Needs• Agency Technology Refresh• Fixed Capital Outlay for Domestic Violence Centers• Enterprise Imaging Management System• Vehicle Replacement• Substance Abuse And Mental Health Information System• Strategic Investment In Determining Treatment Needs And EstablishCost Of Substance Abuse Services• Improve Server Management And Capacity Planning• Emergency Generators For The Access Call Centers• Children's Mental Health Family-to-family Support NetworkDemonstration Project• Licensing Information System And Training Curriculum$16,210,895$11,853,482$9,080,377$3,336,6603,000,000$2,867,500$2,163,759$1,789,105$1,500,000$725,000$478,500$440,000$103,00028 Updated January 17, 2008

Notes29 Updated January 17, 2008

Florida’s State Plan for thePrevention of Child Abuse,Abandonment, and Neglect:July 2005 through June 2010Together, we have the power to prevent child abuse.2007 Progress ReportSubmitted byThe Florida Interprogram Task ForceOctober 2007

Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & NeglectTable of ContentsBackground …………………………………………………………….. 3Vision, Mission, Goals………………………………………………….. 4Primary Outcomes……………………………………………………... 5State Task Force………………………………………………………… 6Local Planning Teams………………………………………………….. 6Major Activities During FY 2006-07…………………………………... 7Challenges and Opportunities for the Future…………………………. 8Highlights of Objectives Organized by Functional Area……………. 9Health…………………………………………………………….. 9Safety……………………………………………………………... 11Education & Child Care………………………………………… 12Substance Abuse & Mental Health…………………………….. 14Housing & Economic Stability…………………………………. 14Statewide & Local Collaboration………………………………. 15Funding & Accountability………………………………………. 1624/1/09

Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & NeglectBackgroundFlorida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, and Neglect: July 2005through June 2010 is a family-centered and community-based plan which takes a broad view of thefactors that impact child abandonment, abuse, and neglect. The Plan emphasizes primary preventionstrategies: factors and strategies that sustain children and families in supportive, nurturing, safe andstable environments. Collaboration with the communities ultimately responsible for implementing andassuring the success of this planning effort is essential.The Inter-program Task Force on Child Abuse Prevention is a state level planning, technical assistanceand policy support workgroup made up of representatives from child serving agencies, organizations andprograms, advocates, consumers, and community facilitators. Designated in the fall of 2004, the TaskForce works to develop Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, andNeglect: July 2005 through June 2010 (the Plan) and coordinate local planning efforts. The TaskForce established seven (7) subcommittees to address the functional areas into which the Plan’sobjectives were grouped: Health, Safety, Education/Child Care, Substance Abuse/Mental Health,Housing and Economic Security, State-Local Collaboration, and Funding/Accountability.The Task Force met quarterly since its first meeting in the fall of 2004 and subcommittees have metperiodically to work on assigned objectives. Bi-monthly conference calls have been held between TaskForce members and the local planning coordinators to facilitate local planning activities.In 2007, the Child Abuse Prevention and Permanency Advisory Council was established under theauspices of the newly created Office of Adoption and Child Protection within the Executive Office ofthe Governor. As the Advisory Council will assume responsibilities for child abuse prevention planningat the state level, the Inter-Program Task Force on Child Abuse Prevention held its final meeting in June2007, and submits this final progress report on the goals and objectives of the Plan.34/1/09

Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & NeglectVision:Florida’s highest priority is that children are raised in healthy, safe,stable, and nurturing families.Mission:To serve as a blueprint that will be implemented to provide for thecare, safety, and protection of all of Florida’s children in anenvironment that fosters healthy social, emotional, intellectual, andphysical development.Goals:1. All families and communities ensure that children are safe and nurturedand live in stable environments that promote well-being.2. State, local, and community resources comprise a collaborative,responsive, family-centered service delivery system that promotes the wellbeingand safety of children, families, and communities.3. The prevention continuum has the capacity to ensure the needs ofchildren and families will be addressed competently, collaboratively,and effectively.4. The prevention continuum’s accountability system ensures the evidencebasedeffectiveness of planning and resource utilization.44/1/09

Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & NeglectPrimary OutcomesBy June 30, 2010, the child abuse rate will be reduced from the fiscal year 2003-04statewide rate of 29.4 to 15.0 per 1,000 children.Child Abuse Rate (Per 1,000)353030.4 30.5 29.4 29.6 30.429Rate252015105015.02006-072005-062004-052003-042002-032001-022000-01Desired Outcome 2010By June 30, 2010, the re-abuse rate (within six months of initial abuse) will be reducedfrom the 2003 statewide rate of 9.2% to 4.0%.Child Re-Abuse RatePercent12108647.8 7.69.6 9.210.8 11.1 10.824.0202000200120022003200420052006Desired Outcome 2010YearThese data show that, despite current efforts to reduce abuse and re-abuse rates, Florida’schildren are in increasing jeopardy for abuse and neglect. There needs to be a refocus ofefforts to effectively address the risks in our communities that contribute to rising levelsof abuse and neglect and to promote protective factors for children and families.54/1/09

Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & NeglectState Task ForceThe Interprogram Task Force is co-chaired by the Department of Children and Familiesand the Department of Health. Representation from other agencies and groups include:Agency for Persons with Disabilities, Agency for Workforce Innovation, CommunityAlliances, Community Based Care, Department of Community Affairs, Department ofEducation, Department of Elder Affairs, Department of Juvenile Justice, Department ofLaw Enforcement, Florida Housing Finance Corporation, Healthy Families Florida,Parents, Prevent Child Abuse Florida, Redlands Christian Migrant Association, and theUnited Way. The Task Force met three times during the 2006-07 fiscal year.The seven Task Force subcommittees meet on a periodic basis to track and reportstatewide progress on the sixty-plus Plan Objectives. Subcommittee participationextends beyond the members of the Task Force; other individuals participate based ontheir interest and expertise is specific topical areas. This has afforded the Task Forceinput from a wide array of individuals, programs, and agencies.6Local Planning TeamsLocal planning and implementation teams consist of members from local organizationsthat are comparable to the members of the statewide Task Force. Local teams neededassistance in including all the desired stakeholders, and the Florida Interprogram TaskForce assisted by providing local planning team leaders with lists of local contacts for thevarious organization and agencies that need to be included. These lists make it possiblefor local planning team leaders to know who to contact to ensure broad representation. Inaddition, some include representatives from news media, advocacy groups, courts, faithbasedorganizations, funding organizations, and Children’s Services Councils.A minimum of one local team exists for each Department of Children and Familiesdistrict, however because of the diverse nature of each district, some formed countybasedteams. Many local teams have also formed subcommittees to address objectives inparticular domains. Membership on local teams, based on the most current informationavailable to the Task Force is available on the web at:www.dcf.state.fl.us/childabuseprevention/4/1/09

Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & NeglectMajor Activities During FY 2006-07Implementation activities include actions at the state and local levels:• Bimonthly conference calls between Task Force subcommitteemembers and local planning team members addressed a varietyof issues and concerns that helped improve both statewide and localplanning and implementation efforts.• The Task Force provided technical assistance to local planning teams based onspecific requests.• Local planning groups reported their progress to the Task Force.• Congruence between Local and State-level planning efforts has been measuredbased on a comparison of the relationship of Local Plan objectives to State Planobjectives. This past year, there was an 88% congruence of Local and State-levelobjectives.• Six state agencies and several state level advocacy groups continued to providesupport for Task Force activities.• The Task Force, through subcommittee reports, and an annual progress report,regularly reviews progress in actions taken to implement The Plan. The TaskForce evaluates both the process of implementation and the values of indicators formajor outcomes and for each objective.• Representatives from the Task Force participated in a federal Centers for DiseaseControl PREVENT project and developed a methodology for reviewing andlocating programs along the prevention continuum.• Representatives of the Task Force conducted ongoing comparisons to otherprevention and intervention plans, and worked to incorporate child abuse andneglect prevention goals and objectives across the spectrum of preventionplanning. Child abuse prevention goals and objectives are currently beingaddressed in the following plans and reports:o Department of Children and Families Five Year Plano Department of Health’s Long Range Program Plano Office of Drug Control Drug Control Strategyo Child Abuse Death Review Committeeo Drug Endangered Children Allianceo Substance Abuse Advisory Council74/1/09

Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & NeglectChallenges and Opportunities for the FutureThe Task Force has sustained a 4-year continuous and evolving planning andimplementation effort across several state agencies, advocacy groups and local teams.The continuity of this initiative has been possible because of the commitment of theleadership of the involved state agencies. Agency staff committed time and effort toensure that activities were undertaken and that the Task Force through its subcommitteeswas aware of progress and barriers toward achieving the identified objectives. Staffworked diligently to ensure that there was cross integration of objectives in various stateplans. This integration is an important component of addressing the fundamental issuesthat contribute to the prevention of child maltreatment.Progress on several of the infrastructure objectives that were considered essential to thedevelopment of an effective and efficient system was hindered for lack of resources tosupport the needed research and investigative efforts, primarily around identifyingevidence-based programs and outcomes. This is a quickly emerging arena of study thatwill be instrumental in future planning and implementation efforts.The 2007 Legislature created the Office of Adoption and Child Protection in theExecutive Office of the Governor. This Office was assigned much of the sameresponsibilities that the Task Force had undertaken in development and implementationof Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, andNeglect: July 2005 through June 2010. In addition, the 2007 Legislature created theFlorida Children and Youth Cabinet which is charged with developing and implementinga “shared and cohesive vision using integrated services to improve child, youth andfamily outcomes…”The Florida Inter-Program Task Force for the Prevention of Child Abuse is passing on allof its data, work products, information and support to the new Office of Adoption andChild Protection. We look forward, individually and collectively, to the opportunity towork with the Office in any capacity to continue efforts to ensure that all Florida’schildren are raised in health, safe, stable and nurturing families and communities.84/1/09

Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & NeglectHighlights of Objectives Organized by Functional AreasThe original Plan had over sixty-one discrete objectives. Over the past three years as the Task Force and the Subcommittees have worked,some objectives have been revised to coincide with agency plans, some objectives have been put on hold because additional resources werenot available to pursue the work needed to establish indicators or collect baseline data. Reported here is just a sampling of some of theobjectives for which there has been progress over the past three years.HealthPoor child and family health are risk factors for child maltreatment. Therefore, The Plan includes several objectives related to health promotion including the preventionof low birth weight babies, the expansion of provision of well-child care including immunization, the expansion of health insurance coverage, and maximizing thelikelihood that children are raised by two mature parents with access to support services.Preventing childhood abuse has been found to have empirically sound proven health benefits for individuals and for the communities in which they reside. Primary andsecondary prevention programs that promote child and family health reduce the likelihood of child maltreatment and are important to long-term health outcomes forchildren. Quality child abuse prevention programs can play a large part in reducing short and long-term health costs.Indicator Chart Status/CommentObjective 1.1: ByJune 30, 2010, thelow birth weight ratewill be reduced fromthe 2003 statewiderate of 8.5% to 5.0%.Percent of live birthswith birth weights ofless than 5.5 pounds.1086420Low Birth weight Rate8.0 8.2 8.4 8.5 8.6 8.8 8.75.0200420032002200120002010 Objective20062005The 2007 Legislatureappropriated an additional$2 million targeted toreduce low birth weightand preterm births in theState.The Department of Healthsponsored trainings on“Promoting MaternalMental Health” that helpspregnant women with theemotional and psychologicaladjustment to pregnancyand new motherhood.Training on maternaldepression was provided toHealthy Start staff andnumerous venues.94/1/09

Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & NeglectObjective 1.19: ByJune 30, 2010, thekindergartenimmunization ratewill be increasedfrom the 2003statewide level of94.5% to 97.0%.The percent ofchildren inkindergarten whoseimmunization recordswere surveyed by theDepartment of Healthwhose records indicatethey received allimmunizationsrecommended by theAdvisory Committeeon ImmunizationPractices (ACIP) fortheir age group.Percent100Percent of Children Immunized in Kindergarten9080702010 Objective200620052004200320022001200094.7 92.5 94.5 93.7 97.2 94.7 97.093.62006/2007 results for theKindergarten and SeventhGrade Immunization StatusReport (for all kindergartenstudents in Florida)indicate:*94.6% of kindergartenstudents reported fullimmunization for schoolentry/ attendanceThis is a slight reductionfrom the 2005-2006immunization rate.SafetyTo promote the well-being of children it is essential they have the opportunity to experience healthy, safe and nurturing environmentswithin their home, family, community, and society.Indicator Chart Status/CommentObjective 1.12:By June 30, 2010,juvenile referrals formisdemeanors,felonies, and otherdelinquent offenceswill be reduced fromthe 2003-04statewide rate of56.2 to 51.0 per1,000 youth.Rate of juvenilereferrals for felonies,misdemeanors, andother delinquentoffenses per 1,000youth at risk asdetermined byDepartment ofJuvenile Justice.Rate806040200Juvenile Referral Ratesper 1,000 At-Risk Youth2010 Objective2004-052003-042002-032001-022000-011999-200061.258.956.555.856.251.151.0Juvenile referral rates have beenconsistently falling since 2000. Thereferral rate for 2005 of 51.1 has nearlyachieved the 2010 rate of 51.0.124/1/09

Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & NeglectObjective 1.13:By June 30, 2010,the reporteddomestic violencerate will bereduced from the2002 statewiderate of 730.7 to365.0 per 100,000population.Number of domesticviolence reports per100,000 population.Rate10008006004002000Domestic Violence Reportsper 100,000 People779.8759.4730.7707.0683.8671.9627.7365.02010 ObjectiveThe Domestic Violence crimes rate has beenreduced by 20% since 2000.The Florida Department of Law Enforcementreports that domestic violence crimesdeclined from 1996 through 2005 at a rateof 3.4% annually. If this decline continuesthere will be a total reduction of 45% inincidents from 1996 to 2010.Objective 1.14: ByJune 30, 2010, childdeaths from violencerelated injury(homicide or suicide)will be reduced fromthe 2002 statewidelevel of 3.5 to 1.0 per100,000 children.Number of deathsfrom violence relatedinjury (homicide orsuicide) per 100,000ages 0 to 18.Rate5432102006200520042003200220012000Child Violence Related Injury Death Rate(per 100,000 Children)2006200520042003200220012000199919984.2 4.0 3.5 3.1 3.5 2.933.35 3.91 3.99 1.02010 Objec...The steady decline in the violent death ratefor children saw an increase in 2005. Thisincrease was due largely to a 48% rise insuicides. The Suicide Prevention Workgroupin the Department of Health continues toaddress issues related to the prevention ofchild suicide.134/1/09

Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & NeglectObjective 1.16: ByJune 30, 2010, thenumber ofcollaborative statelocalunintentionalinjury partnerships,such as SAFEKIDSlocal coalitions andchapters, willincrease from the2005 statewide levelof 16 to 20.Number of countieswith collaborativestate-localunintentional injurypartnerships, suchas SAFE KIDS localcoalitions andchapters.Number35302520151050Number of Counties withUnintentional Injury Partnerships101416202004200320022001200028 2831202010 Objective20062005The number of counties with a collaborativeunintentional injury partnership continuesto increase. The 2010 Objective wasachieved in 2003 and has risen since thento 31 counties involved in partnerships.Objective 2.9: ByJune 30, 2010, thepercent of youth whoreceived delinquencyprevention servicesthat remain crimefree for at least oneyear will increasefrom the 2002-2003statewide value of87% to 91%.Percent of youth whoreceived delinquencyprevention servicesand remain crime freefor at least one yearPercentPercent of Youth Who RemainCrime Free ForOne Year After ReceivingDelinquency Prevention Services10080604020086 87 88 912001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2009-10ObjectiveYearThe most recent data available is forthe 2003-04 state fiscal year. There is asmall upward trend in youth whoremain crime free for a year postservices.144/1/09

Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & NeglectEducation & Child CareEducation serves as primary prevention to child abuse and neglect by helping youth develop and enhance critical life managementskills necessary to make sound decisions and take positive actions for healthy and effective living.High quality child care, including Head Start programs, serves as primary prevention of child abuse and neglect for several reasons.These programs: Provide parents with regular or occasional, safe out-of-home care for their children; Serve as resources to improveparenting skills and reduce inappropriate interactions between parents and children; Provide opportunities for children to learn basicsocial skills.IndicatorChartStatus/CommentObjective 1.7: ByJune 30, 2010, thepercent ofkindergartenchildren ready tolearn will beincreased from the2003-2004statewide level of84% to 95%.Percent of childrenenteringkindergartenevaluated as readyto learn.Percent100959085807570Percent of KindergartenersReady to Learn83 8482848220062004-052003-042002-032001-022000-018495The Office of Early Learning beganimplementing changes to the statewidekindergarten program for the 2006-07school year. School Readiness UniformScreening System has been replaced andthe new statewide kindergarten program isthe Florida Kindergarten ReadinessScreener (FLKRS).2010 Objective154/1/09

Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & NeglectObjective 1.8: ByJune 30, 2010,Florida’s graduationrate will be increasedfrom the 2002-2003statewide rate of69.0% to 85.0%.Percent of studentsgraduating high schoolwithin four years ofentering ninth grade.Percent of Students Graduating FromHigh SchoolPercent1008060402063.867.9 69.0 71.6 71.9 7185.0The gradual increase in the Graduation rateexperienced a bump in 2005-06 with a slightdecrease. This is not sufficient data todetermine a change in the overall upwardtrend for graduation rates.This objective has been aligned with the goalsof the Florida Department of Education HighSchool Reform Task Force.02000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2009-10ObjectiveYearObjective 1.17C:By June 30, 2010,children enrolledin public schoolswill have increasedaccess to healthand mental healthservices.Increased healthand mental healthservices to studentsin public schools,which result indecreased ESEplacements,decreased disciplinereferrals, andincreased studentattendance.No ChartThe State Network of AssociationPresidents (SNAP) developed a draft ofStudent Support Services Guidelines inSpring 2007. The Guidelines addressprovision of school-based health and mentalhealth services. SNAP will meet again inNovember 2007 to review issues related tothe provision of related services, includingmental health services, to eligible studentsin K12 public education164/1/09

Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & NeglectObjective 1.21:By July 1, 2008,school readinessfunds to accesschild care serviceswill be availablefor all children atrisk of abuse orneglect as definedby the Agency forWorkforceInnovation’s Officeof Early Learning.Percentage ofchildren underinvestigation orprotectivesupervision of theDepartment ofChildren andFamilies who wereserved by schoolreadiness funds asof June 30 eachyear.Percent of Children under Protective Supervisionserved through School Readiness FundsPercent10080604020097 100 1002005 2006 2009-10ObjectiveObjective 1.21Completed Children underprotective supervision receive priorityplacement. Therefore, 100% of childrenunder protective supervision will be servedBaseline established 6/06 of 24,863 childrenin protective supervision were being servedstatewide.06/07: 26,178 children statewide inprotective supervision were being servedObjective 1.23:By June 30, 2010,there will be astatewide increasein availability ofhigher-qualitylicensed or licenseexemptearlylearning programs.Percentage oflicensed or licenseexemptprogramsthat have licensingcomplaints orhealth/safetyviolations.Percentages ofaccredited earlylearning programsstatewide (GoldSeal).No ChartThe Office of Early Learning continues thedevelopment of a statewide, uniformQuality Rating System (QRS) for Florida.QRS criteria are a priority for the EarlyLearning Advisory Committee. As the QRSpilot House and Senate bills did not passduring the 2007 legislative session, AWI-OEL will continue work in this areathrough subcommittee recommendations.Objective 1.26:By June 30, 2008,determine theappropriateness,feasibility andmethods ofexpanding FloridaThe percent ofpublic middle andhigh schools thatdeliver courseofferings thataddress preventionof unintentionalNo Chart17Based on the 2006 High School Reformlegislation, health education as a standalone course (LMS) is no longerrequired. Health is integrated into theone credit Physical Educationrequirement “1 credit physicaleducation to include the integration of4/1/09

Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglectpublic schoolcurricula toinclude courseofferings thataddress preventionof: unintentionalinjuries, violence,suicide, tobaccouse and addiction,alcohol and otherdrug use,unintendedpregnancy, HumanDeficiencySyndrome(HIV),/AcquiredImmuneDeficiencySyndrome (AIDS),SexuallyTransmittedDisease (STD)infection,unhealthy diet,inadequatephysical activity,and environmentalhealth.injuries, violence,suicide, tobacco useand addiction,alcohol and otherdrug use,unintendedpregnancy, HumanImmunodeficiencyVirus (HIV)/AcquiredImmunodeficiencySyndrome (AIDS),SexuallyTransmittedDiseases (STD)infection, unhealthydiet, inadequatephysical activity,and environmentalhealth.health.” The elimination of the healtheducation requirement poses a setbackfor efforts to expand the informationprovided to students on varioushealth-related topics.Objective 1.26 Completed----Results:Based on the 2006 School Health ProfilesReport (weighted data), the percentage ofFlorida Middle Schools that require healtheducation for students: 57%; the percentageof Junior/Senior High School Combined thatrequire health education for students: 65%,and the percentage of Florida High Schoolsthat require health education for students:95%.184/1/09

Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & NeglectObjective 1.27:By June 30, 2008,develop andimplement amethod todetermine thepercent of publichigh schools inFlorida offeringcourses thataddress parentingskillsPercent of public highschools in Floridaoffering courses thataddress parentingskills.100%80%60%40%20%Percent of High Schools OfferingParenting Classes0%2004-05 2005-06 2010ObjectiveThe Department of Education has amechanism to determine what courses areoffered by Middle and High schools.The 2006 High School Reform Acteliminated the requirement for LifeManagement classes; thus the percent ofhigh schools offering such course work maydecline.In 2004-05 Life Management Skills wasoffered in 147 of 431 high schools (34%); in2005-06 it was offered in164 of 630 highschools (26%).In 2004-2005 Parenting Skills (an electivecourse) was offered in 127 of 431 publichigh schools (29.5%); in 2005-06 it wasoffered in 129 of 630 high schools (20%)Objective 2.16:By June 30, 2007,each Florida publicschool district willestablish a writtenpolicy for theimmediate reportof suspected orknown child abuseby an individualwho is employed orotherwisecontracted by apublic school.Existence of writtenpolicies in each schooldistrict for reportingchild abuse.No ChartObjective 2.16: CompletedHB 7173 amending section 39.01 (48),F.S. passed during the 2006 legislativesession providing language that wouldrequire school districts to report suspectedabuse on the part of school systememployees.194/1/09

Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & NeglectSubstance Abuse & Mental HealthSubstance abuse and mental health are critical components of a full-system of child abuse prevention. Most children enteringFlorida’s child welfare system were exposed to familial substance abuse, domestic violence or mental illness.Substance abuse is recognized as a presenting problem in no less than half of all children known to the child welfare system.Providing effective, efficient and easily accessible substance abuse treatment and prevention services is required in order tosubstantially reduce instances of child maltreatment. Moreover, substance abuse prevention and treatment span the entire childmaltreatment prevention continuum.Mental health issues often correspond to child welfare issues when gone untreated. Many children with mental illness/emotionaldisturbance often present difficulties for parents to adequately handle. When children with these emotional/behavioral issues do nothave sufficient services and supports, additional stress is placed on the family system. Situations involving infants and toddlers thatlack necessary services and supports often experience problems with attachment, which lead to a multitude of other problems.Behavioral health integration with child welfare services is critical to resolving issues that brought the child into care and developingpositive child well-being and permanency outcome. Further, early identification and intervention to meet behavioral health needs ofboth parents and children are essential for adequate prevention of child maltreatment and instances of re-abuse.Indicator Chart Status/CommentObjective 2.7: ByJune 30, 2010, thepercent of Floridayouth who usealcohol or anyillicit drug willdecrease from thestatewide 2004level of 37.1 to33.4.The percent ofmiddle and highschool youthreporting alcohol orillicit drug use inthe past 30 days onthe Florida YouthSubstance AbuseSurvey.Percent40363228Percent of Youth reportingCurrent Use of Alcohol or Illicit Drugs37.135.236.133.42003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2009-10YearObjectiveThe percent of Floridayouth who reportedhaving used alcohol orany illicit drug in theprevious 30 days was36.0% in 2006. This isdown by 1.1 percentagepoint since the 2004baseline, but a slightincrease of 0.8percentage points since2005. The rate is drivenlargely by underagedrinking.204/1/09

Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & NeglectObjective 2.8: ByJune 30, 2010, adultillicit drug use andbinge alcohol useamong adults willdecrease by 10%from 2002 statewidelevels.Percent of adultsreporting use of anyillicit drug in the past30 days.Percent of adultsreporting binge alcoholuse in the past 30 days.Percent2520151050Illicit Drug Use Among18 to 25-Year Old Adults23.5521.3220.0821.34 21.202002 2004 2010ObjectiveYearFlorida continues toexperience higher ratesof illicit drug abuse andbinge alcohol use thannational averages.There has been a slightdecrease in Illicit DrugUse in Florida since2002.Illicit Drug Use Among26 Years and Older Adults2520Percent151056.31 6.58 5.64 6.08 5.6802002 2004 2010YearObjectiveSource for the 4 tables: 2005 State Estimates of Substance Use & Mental Health,SAMHSA214/1/09

Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & NeglectBinge Drinking in Adults18 to 25 Years of AgePercent5040302010039.28 39.02 38.96 38.6935.35200220032004Year20052010 ObjectiveThe Binge Drinkingrate has remainedvirtually unchanged forthe past 4 years.Binge Drinking Among26 Years and Older AdultsPercent5040302010021.76 20.76 19.99 20.44 19.58200220032004Year20052010 ObjectiveSource for the 4 tables: 2005 State Estimates of Substance Use & Mental Health,SAMHSA224/1/09

Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & NeglectHousing & Economic StabilityPoverty and lack of other resources, such as adequate housing, are strongly associated with child maltreatment, particularly neglect.Extremely low incomes and overcrowded or insecure housing conditions put a tremendous amount of stress on family systems.Therefore, an adequate infrastructure that supports career development and full employment for parents so that they earn sufficientwages to support their families; provides a safety net for families threatened with loss of their homes due to natural disasters or adownturn in the family support system; and provides individualized support and services that maintain family integrity for familieswho are temporarily homeless is essential to ensuring the protective factors that prevent child abuse and neglect.Indicator Chart Status/CommentObjective 1.4: ByJune 30, 2010, thepercent of childrenliving in poverty willbe reduced from the2003 statewide levelof 19.2% to 10%.The percent ofchildren under 18living in poverty.PercentPercent of Children Living in Poverty2520151050200620052004200320022001200016.1 18.8 16.5 19.2 17.0 15.3 14.3 10.0Based on US Censusestimates the percent ofchildren in Floridaliving in povertypeaked in 2003 and hasshown a steady declinein the past 3 years.2010 Obj...Source: U.S. Census Bureau StatisticsObjective 1.5: ByJune 30, 2010, thepercent of familiesliving in povertywill be reducedfrom the 2003statewide level of9.7% to 8.0%.The percent offamilies below thepoverty level.Percent121086420Percent of Families Living in Poverty9.0 9.7 9.0 9.1 8.4 8.0200020032004200520062010 ObjectiveCurrent US Censusestimates indicate thatthe percent of Floridafamilies living inpoverty (below 100% ofthe Federal PovertyLevel) continues toslowly decline.Source: U.S. Census Bureau Statistics234/1/09

Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & NeglectObjective 1.6: ByJune 30, 2010, thechildren’shomelessness ratewill be reducedfrom the 2003statewide rate of4.57 to 2.00 per1,000 children.Number of children(under age 18) thatare homeless per1,000 children.RateHomeless Children Rate (per 1,000 children)65432104.95 4.23 4.672001200220035.20 4.43200420052.98 2.0020062010 Objec...Five of the fourteenDCF districts reportattaining this objective.The dramatic decreasereflected in 2006 maybe partially related to achange in methodologyused.Statewide & Local CollaborationA successful statewide effort to reduce child maltreatment requires actions both on a statewide and a local level; it also requires thatthe local and statewide efforts be closely coordinated. Local communities are taking more ownership in addressing the needs of theirresidents, resulting in a variety of innovative and effective practices in the area of child abuse prevention and intervention beingdeveloped and implemented across the state. The Plan requires collaboration between statewide and local organizations and a broadspectrum of local organizations. Statewide collaboration is needed to develop uniform processes and strategies for identifying gaps inservices, assessing the capacity for prevention services, the components of the prevention continuum, sharing best and effectivepractices, and evaluating the impact of prevention efforts.Objective 2.4: ByJune 30, 2010, allFlorida citizensand serviceproviders will haveaccess to a wellmaintained,easyto-usedatabasethat providesinformation aboutservices, programs,and providers inthe preventionIndicator Chart Status/CommentPercent of countieswith access to 211, aweb-basedcomprehensive listof communityresources.Percent of Counties with Access to a Web-basedComprehensive List of Community ResourcesPercent1008060402000.0 4.5 17.92438.8 42.3 68.782100.02010 Objective2006200520042003200220012000As of June 2007, 55counties were includedin the 2-1-1 Network.2-1-1 is the health andhuman serviceequivalent of 9-1-1. TheFlorida 2-1-1 Networkwas created byauthorization of theFlorida Legislature in2002.The Network is a4/1/09

Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglectcontinuum.system of collaborativerelationships betweenmany 2-1--1centers,specialized informationand referral providersand other humanservice organizations.The Florida Alliance ofInformation andReferral Services(FLAIRS) providesleadership and agovernance structurefor the Network.Reference above Chart.Objective 3.5: ByJune 30, 2010,100% of Florida’scommunities willestablish andmaintain a singletelephoneaccessiblecomprehensiveinventory ofcommunityresources.Percent of countieswith acomprehensive andwell-maintained listof communityresources meetingthe specifications of2-1-1.I&R programs helpindividuals, families,and communitiesidentify, understand,and effectively use theprograms that comprisethe human servicedelivery system. I&Rproviders today haveexpanded means forbringing people andservices together, andthey are serving awider range ofinquirers.254/1/09

Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & NeglectFunding & AccountabilityThe Plan identified an increased need for child abuse prevention resources. However, before requesting additional resources, theTask Force identified a need to ensure accountability for currently funded programs and to develop strategies for primary preventionacross agencies and programs that can collaborate, better leveraging limited resources.Indicator Chart Status/CommentObjective 3.3: ByJune 30, 2009,100% of serviceproviders canidentify and accessthe array oftraditional andnon-traditionalsupports necessaryto meet the needsof the families theyserve.Percent of serviceproviders surveyedthat are aware ofthe list ofcommunity supportsystems.No ChartRepresentatives of theTask Force participatedin a federal Centers forDisease ControlPREVENT Project in2006-07. The FloridaProject resulted in thedevelopment of amethod to review andlocate programs alongthe prevention servicecontinuum. This willassist state and localplanners indetermining servicecapacity and gaps.264/1/09

Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & NeglectVisionFlorida’shighest priorityis that children are raisedin healthy, safe,stable, and nurturingfamilies.274/1/09

Florida’s State Plan for the Prevention of Child Abuse, Abandonment, & Neglect284/1/09

AttachmentSERVICING CHILD WELFARE CLIENT NEEDS: Emergencyand Disaster Preparedness ActivitiesDeveloping a Plan:1. Identify all possible disasters that can impact protection of children and deliveryof child welfare services that may be unique to your geographical locale andwould require specific planning and response. This would also includeforeseeable and unforeseeable threats.2. Establish a process that involves consultation with all child welfare partners inplan development (local courts, Guardian Ad Litem, Child Protection Teams, lawenforcement, etc.) and reaches out to common partners in times of emergency(Department of Health, hospitals, emergency management agencies, shelters,food banks, courts, volunteers, etc.).3. Establish a procedure for all caregivers of children under supervision to provideevacuation plans (include in-home, relative, non-relative, foster and adoptive).For licensed placements, ensure that the evacuation plans are reviewed at eachre-licensure.4. Identify a single individual responsible for coordination of child welfare disasterplanning and response. This individual will also be a lead responsible forcommunication with local media, assigning tasks, serving as liaison to otherjurisdictions and central office, and communication of expectations to staff.Identify other key staff and duties and how overall provider communications willbe sustained during a threat.5. Identify location for operations in case of serious damage to the work centers, thereporting mechanism for provider staff and methods of communication (phonetrees, web-sites, cell phones, toll-free phone numbers, etc.).6. Identify how to complete contacts with caregivers for all children underDepartment supervision prior to a known threat to ensure that they are followingthe submitted disaster plan.7. Have a plan to secure all electronic and hard copy records (to include back-upservers in safe locations and proper care of electronic equipment). The planshould take into account emergencies and disasters that may present withoutwarning.8. Maintain a supply of emergency cash on hand in response to possible poweroutages in order to purchase emergency items for children or families.9. Provide each staff member with a copy of the emergency and disaster plan andprocedures and conduct training, test exercises and drills as appropriate.10. Ensure provider training includes assisting children to handle and cope withdisasters and possible relocation.11. Ensure that providers who evacuate have critical demographic, health andservice needs information with them for children in their care.12. Update the plan regularly.i

AttachmentManaging Disaster:1. Assess the availability of staff and condition of facilities and equipment.Reassign staff as demanded by conditions.2. Ensure that provider staff and their families are provided assistance as needed.3. Determine the essential functions that must be carried out and in what areaswaivers or flexibility may be appropriate. Ensure that staff is aware of changes infunctions.4. The plan should address how providers will conduct an immediate, initialassessment of the location and needs of children under supervision, their parentsand caregivers.5. Plan to conduct an immediate assessment of changes in the needs of children,families, and caregivers (in-home, relative, non-relative and foster/adopt) servedby the child welfare system resulting from the disaster. Consider the need toprovide new, additional services to impacted children and families. Ensure thatneeded services, both pre-existing and new, are available and provided at theirlocation. Consider the following typical needs after a traumatic event:• Immediate trauma services for children and families;• Assistance for medically fragile children and their caregivers;• More time for service visits;• Connection to other programs that provide benefit resources (e.g., rebuildinghousing and Food for Florida);• Child care for families while they seek assistance.ii

AttachmentRebuilding1. Indicate what steps the provider will take to ensure that there is the capacity torespond to potential increases in investigations, service needs and overallworkload. This may include investigating and opening new cases or providingservices to children and families that may have relocated from within state orfrom out of state. The workload management plan should address the followingconsiderations:• Identification of new cases of children who are abused or neglected, orseparated from their family due to the disaster, and provision of appropriateservices;• Provision of services to children and families evacuated from other states toFlorida or relocated from other jurisdictions within Florida;• Working through the Florida Interstate Compact on the Placement of ChildrenOffice to coordinate services and share information with other states aboutrelocated children and families;• Identification of emergency placement slots in the event a foster or biologicalfamily cannot find temporary housing suitable for children;• Ensure that messages about services and provision of services are sensitiveto the trauma that families have experienced and that they continue to beculturally competent given the stress already on families that may havecultural and language considerations;• Procedures for reporting information on children and families that may havebeen separated during the event so that they are reunified or able tocommunicate as quickly as possible.2. Address emotional needs of staff to help them deal with the added stress andtrauma of a disaster as related to child welfare work and their own family’ssituation.3. Describe a debriefing process for staff and key stakeholders.4. Fortify areas of strength and redesign areas that require improvement.5. Update plans based on lessons learned, not just by providers, but by all partnersin the child welfare community.6. Ensure that staff and clients are educated and trained in emergency proceduresafter each plan update.iii

State of FloridaDepartment of Children and FamiliesCharlie GristGovernorRobert A. ButtenrorthSecretaryJune 10,2008Ana Maria Pozo. Executive DirectorFoster Care Review. lnc.155 South MiamiAvenue, Suite 601Miami, Florida 33130Re: The 2007 Annual Citizen Review ReportDear Ms. Pozo:Thank you for your continuous commitment to improving Florida's child protection system.Please let your board and panel members know that the work you do provides criticalinsights into the system of care in Miami-Dade/Monroe, as well as child protection trendsacross Florida.This is to acknowledge receipt of the 2007 Foster Care Review annual reporthat yousent. I will share this report with Department of Children and Families (DCF) SouthernRegion Director, DCF Circuits 11 and 16 Circuit Administrator and Our Kids of Miami -Dade/Monroe, lnc's Chief Executive Officer.Again, I appreciate your analysis and input, and look fonruard to continued collaboration. lfyou have any questions, please feel free to contact Mukweso Mwenene at (850) 922-0510or M u kweso_Mwenene@dcf. state.fl . us.Sincerelv,Affi^P*!t)Patricia BadlandDirectorOffice of Family Safetycc:Alan Abramowitz, Region Director, Southern RegionGifda Ferradaz, Circuit Administrator, DCF Circuit 11 and 16Frances Allegra, CEO, Our Kids of Miami-Dade/Monroe, Inc1317 \Mnewood Boulevard, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0700Mission: Protect the Vulnerable, Promote Strong and Economically Self-Sufficient Families, andAdvance Personal and Family Recovery and Resiliency

Annual Report2007

His Name is TodayWe are guilty of many errors and many faultsBut our worst crime is abandoning the children,Neglecting the fountain of life.Many of the things we need can wait,The child cannot.Right now is the time his bones are being formed,His blood is being made,And his senses are being developed.To him we cannot answer 'Tomorrow.'His name is 'Today.'- Gabriela Mistral, Poet Laureate, ChileFoster Care Review, Inc.155 South Miami Avenue Suite 601Miami, FL 33130(305) 573 6665www.fostercarereview.orgFCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 5

From the Executive DirectorFiscal year 2006-7 was another great year of extraordinary efforts by FCR staffand citizen review panel volunteers. Since our founding in 1989, the panelshave monitored the lives of over 40,000 children and contributed 111,751 hoursof community service on behalf of children from our community. Their dedicationis truly admirable: more than 20% have served over 5 years.This year Foster Care Review started reviewing cases of children in relative care.We are also continuing to hold reviews for independent living youth 16 and 17years of age to ensure that they are prepared for adult living when they age outof the system. The data collected on the status of older youth tells a grim story.There were 534 children reviewed between the ages of 13 and 17—about 75%of all children reviewed by our citizen review panels. Of these, 76% have specialeducation needs, 40% have a history of delinquency, 11% are in living injuvenile or adult facilities and 12% are on runaway status. Those who aged outof the system when they turned 18 years—131 youth—also had serious issues.After having spent over four years in foster care, the majority did not have plansfor housing or school, nor an adult relationship that could assist them duringtheir transition to adulthood. These findings reinforce the need for accountabilityfrom those responsible for the children’s day-to-day care. Another lessonlearned from the reviews is the importance to reach out to them at an earlierage.This year was also the first full year of Miami-Dade’s community based careinitiative. Some of the successes are becoming evident at the reviews: moreadoptions, less resets. Our community worked hard to address the upheavalscaused by the transition. FCR is committed to work with our partners to use ourcitizen reviews and our data to identify issues in need of improvement. Withgrant funds from Miami Dade’s Children’s Trust, FCR is making significantupgrades to our database. When the project is completed at the end of 2008,we will be able to provide better outcome data on the status of childrenreviewed and their progress towards permanency. Also, as we review cases ofchildren in relative care, FCR’s data will more accurately represent thedependency population in Miami Dade.We thank the Juvenile Court for its support of our work and for allowing us to beof service to the community. We are also eternally grateful to our friends,supporters, system partners and especially our volunteers, for their continueddedication to children in the foster care system.Ana Maria Pozo, J.D.Executive Director(305) 573-6665 ext. 11anapozo@fostercarereview.org“There can be no keener revelation of a society's soul than the way it treats its children."— Nelson MandelaFCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 6

TABLE OF CONTENTSI. Mission 8II. Achievements 9III. Citizen review hearings 10IV. The children reviewed 14V. Independent Living Reviews 20VI. System Barriers 23VII. 2007 Citizen review panel recommendations 27VIII. History and program description 28IX. Board of Directors 32X. Volunteers 33XI. Organizational Chart 34FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 7

I. MISSION.FCR VisionA world where children are safe, live in permanent homes and grow up incommunities that promote their well-being.FCR MissionFoster Care Review promotes prompt, positive and permanent outcomes fordependent children through case review and advocacy. FCR’s mission isachieved by:‣ Providing independent, third-party oversight to monitor the safety andwellbeing of children in the foster care system‣ Assessing agency compliance with mandated time frames, statutoryrequirements, and accepted best practice standards in child welfare‣ Making recommendations to the judiciary, community based careagencies and other concerned parties‣ Facilitating action toward each child and family’s permanency goal‣ Engaging the participation of all concerned parties‣ Tracking, analyzing and sharing impact and outcome data with ourcommunity partners‣ Educating the public about the needs of foster children‣ Involving the community in the lives of foster children‣ Advocating for system changeFCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 8

II. ACHIEVEMENTSOver the past 18 years, FCR has monitored the safety,wellbeing and permanency of over 40,000 foster children inMiami-Dade.‣ FCR’s citizen review panels reviewed the cases of 1293 children in FY2007, monitoring their safety, wellbeing and progress towardspermanency.‣ Our citizen review panels contributed 4916 hours of service.‣ FCR presented a symposium on Brain Development in the Early Yearsfunded by the Children’s Trust that was attended by 175 persons.‣ The SAIL pilot project (System Accountability for Independent Living) wasimplemented with funds from the Children’s Trust. Five specialized panelsreviewed the cases of 278 youth ages 16 and over, monitoring theirpreparation for adult living.‣ FCR expanded the scope of reviews by reviewing cases of children inrelative care—in addition to those in out of home care. Staff and panelswere trained.‣ Octavio Verdeja received the 2007 Doug Halsey Award for VolunteerService at a reception sponsored by Mellon Bank.‣ Out of 110 volunteers, five (5) volunteers completed 15 years of service;10 completed 10 years of service; and 30 completed 5 years of service.‣ FCR sponsored several events with the goal of expanding its volunteerand donor base: a luncheon at Joe’s Stone Crab, a Broadway musicalevening, and a Friendraiser reception at Mellon Bank.‣ FCR entered into a 3-year contract with Chapin Hall Center for Children,University of Chicago, to provide program monitoring services for thecommunity based care pilot project in Miami-Dade, Monroe and Browardcounties.‣ FCR received an endowment of $740,000 from North Dade MedicalFoundation that provides an annual grant of approximately $25,000; thefund is managed by the Dade Community Foundation.‣ The FCR database is undergoing major upgrades as a result of a $400,000grant from the Children’s Trust.‣ FCR started using a new logo with a more child-friendly look.FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 9

III. CITIZEN REVIEW HEARINGSDuring the past 18 years, FCR’s citizen review program has monitoredthe safety and wellbeing of more than 40,000 children living in Miami-Dade’s foster care system.‣ In FY 2007, Foster Care Review’s citizen review panels reviewed the cases of709 children—approximately 20% of the children under 18 years of age livingin Miami-Dade’s foster care system. As many of the children were reviewedtwice in one year, the duplicate number of children reviewed is 1293.‣ The agencies with the largest number of children reviewed were CHARLEE(29%), CFCE (19%) and KHU (19%). Most of the cases came from thefollowing 3 circuit courts: division 8 (29%), division 9 (25%) and division 3(25%).‣ There were 1733 participants at the reviews (866), an average of 2participants per review. Panel recommendations are based on the informationprovided at reviews; therefore it is important for persons who know aboutthe child to attend the review. Those most likely to participate were casemanagers, the DCF attorney, foster parents and Guardians Ad Litem.‣ As the result of efforts to encourage foster youth to attend their reviews,child participation increased by 36%, from 188 in 2006 to 196 in 2007.‣ As in prior years, attorney representation for parents was discouraging. Mostparents who go reviews do not have a lawyer present. When parents choosenot to proceed without their lawyer, the case must be rescheduled.‣ FCR’s 110 volunteers contributed a total of 4916 hours of their time byserving in one of our 18 citizen review panels. Joined by four of their peers,volunteers dedicate one full day per month to attend review hearingsconducted at the Miami Dade Juvenile Justice Center. Some volunteer twice amonth. They systematically examine the documents provided, inquire as tothe child’s placement, school, health, sibling and parent visitation, and makerecommendations to the court.‣ Our volunteers’ commitment is unparalleled: more than 20% of ourvolunteers have served over 5 years and 10% have served 10 years or more.The 2007 recipient of the Doug Halsey Award for Volunteer Service wasOctavio Verdeja Sr., a well known community leader and child advocate whoserved on a citizen review panel for 10 years.‣ FCR expanded the scope of reviews by hearing the cases of dependentchildren who are placed with relatives, or “relative care”. Generally, there isa concern that children placed with relatives need more oversight. Althoughrelative placements are considered less restrictive and more family-like thana foster home, many of the children end up back in foster care. Findingpermanency in a relative placement can be as difficult as placement in aFCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 10

foster home: some relatives do not want to adopt, some are in denial aboutthe families’ problems—believing that the child will return to the parent andothers are simply unable to care for the child for various reasons.‣ Issues of concern in relative care cases include: qualifying for and receivingstipends, Medicaid eligibility for the child, and services for the child. Data willbe available in next year’s report.‣ Finally, a pilot project started at the request of Judge Cindy Lederman endedin December of 2006. The SAIL project—System Accountability forIndependent Living—involves special reviews of youth 16 and over, with thegoal of ensuring that youth are being prepared for adult living. Based onfindings from the reviews, all children ages 13 to 17 will be reviewed by ourIL panels.‣ FY 2007 was the first full year of community based care, and many of thecourt-related problems resulting from the transition—lack of proper notice,attendance at review—have improved somewhat. Although issues with casemanagement remain, there were 173 case managers who were recognizedfor their excellent handling of cases.Challenges for FY 2008‣ Increase FCR caseload and volunteer corps.‣ Seek funding to continue SAIL project. Plans include increasing the ILpanels to 8; lowering IL reviews to age 13; training staff and volunteers,data collection, and developing a youth outreach program.‣ Collect data on relative care cases.CITIZEN REVIEW STATISTICSFY 2006 FY 2007Review hearings 889 866Children reviewed (single count) 745 709Children scheduled for review (duplicates) 1915 1887Children reviewed (duplicates) 1338 1293Children JRSSRs pre-filed 517 582Cases reviewed (single count) 477 461Cases reviewed (duplicates) 890 854Children whose cases were reset 866 331Volunteer hours 5816 4916Case Manager Commendations 76 173FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 11

Children reviewed – by agency and judicial divisionChildren Reviewed byAgency and Division – (duplicate count)001 002 003 008 009 TotalCFCE 18 41 85 24 74 242CHARLEE 50 31 94 116 89 380CHS 10 23 47 58 51 189FRC 2 0 18 13 5 38HHCH 5 3 1 35 5 59KHU 10 36 77 61 65 249NTF 6 33 6 62 29 136Total 101 167 328 369 318 1293(7%) (14%) (25%) (29%) (25%) (100%)Children reviewed – by agency and age of childChildren Reviewed byAgency and Age Ranges - (single count)# child 0-5 6-12 13-17 %CFCE 131 15 17 99 (19%)CHARLEE 201 14 31 156 (29%)CHS 101 8 20 73 (14%)FRC 23 4 3 16 (3%)HHCH 33 5 10 18 (4%)KHU 133 10 19 104 (19%)NTF 87 7 12 68 (12%)Total 709 63 112 534(9%) (16%) (75%) (100%)Community based care agenciesCFCE Center for Family and Child EnrichmentCHARLEE Children have all rights, legal, educational and emotionalCHS Children’s Home SocietyFCR Family Resource CenterHHCH His House Children’s HomeKHU Kids Hope UnitedNTF Neighbor to FamilyFCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 12

Participation at reviewsParticipantsTotalScheduledNoticesPresent Spkr.PhoneWrittenReports TotalParticipationAtty. for Child 112 49 5 0 54Atty. For Father 95 11 3 0 14Atty. For Mother 136 13 3 0 16DCF 15 14 0 0 14Private Agency 914 898 9 0 907Child 0 188 7 1 196Foster Parent 393 129 14 3 146GAL 285 168 3 6 177GAL Rep 73 50 1 1 52Father 72 8 0 0 8Mother 181 15 0 0 15Pre-Adoptive Parent 2 2 0 0 2Agency Superv. 2 1 1 0 2Other (therapist, etc.) 345 187 19 0 206TOTAL 2842 1733 65 11 1809Case managers commendations - 173Agency Case ManagementCommendations# children Commend %CFCE 131 31 (24%)CHARLEE 201 57 (28%)CHS 101 38 (37%)FRC 23 2 (8%)HHCH 33 14 (42%)KHU 133 16 (12%)NTF 87 15 (17%)Total 709 173 (24%)FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 13

IV. THE CHILDREN REVIEWEDThe typical child reviewed by our citizen review panels is an African Americanmale or female teenager who has learning issues, a history of delinquency andhas lived in a foster home over three years.‣ There were almost as many female (47%) as male (53%) foster childrenreviewed.‣ A majority (75%) of the children reviewed are ages 13 to 17; 23% are 6 to12. This break down is not representative of the general foster carepopulation. Since the start of FCR’s independent living project, many olderchildren are being referred by the courts to the citizen review panels. It isbecause so many of the children reviewed are older that FCR panels are sokeenly concerned of their needs. In response, FCR is making efforts tostrengthen reviews for foster youth.‣ About as many children came into care as the result of neglect (43%) asphysical abuse, or the risk of abuse (42%).‣ Half (50%) of the children are placed in foster homes and a smaller number(21%) live in more specialized facilities that can address their medical ormental health needs.‣ For a small percentage (15%) of the children, the review panels expressedconcerns about the placements, either because of safety issues such asrunning away, delinquent behavior or placements that do not lead topermanency.‣ In FY 2007 there were 61 children reviewed who were on runaway status.‣ As the children come into care, a case plan is developed that outlines thecourse of action required for each child. For 55% of the children the goal isadoption; for 27% it is “another planned permanent living arrangement,” orAPPLA—a goal used specifically for older youth who will most likely age out offoster care.‣ Of children with a plan of adoption or APPLA, 79% spent four or more yearsin foster care. This is too long to spend in a temporary placement. Only 4%of all children reviewed spent less than two years in care.‣ 162 children reviewed achieved permanency through adoption oremancipation. Of these, 131 aged out of the foster care system and 31 wereadopted. The children adopted are always a morale boost for our volunteers,especially when the child has been in care a long time. Of the childrenadopted, 19 (61%) were in care over four years.FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 14

‣ Of those who aged out, 110 (84%) were also in care over four years. It’s thelatter group that causes the most concern, as once they leave the systemmany must depend on themselves for food and housing.‣ Nearly half of the children have special education needs, with the two mostcommon classifications being emotional handicaps (12%) and severeemotional disturbance (11%). Older children have more serious issues, with76% having learning disabilities and 40% a history of delinquency. Many ofthese children came into care with handicaps that are not always addressedin foster care; others develop problems while in care.‣ While Miami-Dade’s population is 66% Hispanic, 22% Black and 12% White,its foster care population is 22% Hispanic, 76% Black and 5% White. Thisdisproportionality of minority children in foster care is an issue beingaddressed nationwide by child welfare professionals. Research indicates thatchildren of color are not at higher risk of abuse and neglect than Caucasianchildren. Why then are there more children of color in foster care?Nationally, African-American children are about 3.5 times as likely as whitechildren to be in state protective custody.‣ FCR’s citizen review panels are committed to ensure that the child’s journeythrough foster care is a safe one. At every review, they ask about the child’splacement, school, health, sibling and parental visits and many other issuesrelated to their wellbeing. By closely and consistently monitoring serviceprovision and encouraging case progress, FCR panels make every effort togive children an opportunity to have a safe and healthy future.Children reviewed - by case plan goal and age group (n= 709)# Children By Age0-5 6-12 13-17+ Total %Adoption 51 93 194 338 (55%)Another Planned Perm Living Arrangement 0 8 180 188 (27%)Independent Living 0 0 3 3 (.2%)Reunification 11 8 22 41 (5.7%Long Term Licensed Custody 0 2 115 117 (16.5%)Long Term Relative Custody 0 1 7 8 (1%)None 0 0 2 2 (.2%)Permanent Guardianship 1 0 3 4 (.5%)Permanent Placement w/relative 0 0 1 1 (0%)Other 0 0 7 7 (.5%)Total 63 112 534 709 100%(9%) (16%) (75%)FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 15

Length of stay in foster careBy case plan goal (n = 709)# Children by Length of Stay (months)13-24 25-36 37-48 48+ Total %Adoption 8 33 29 268 338 (55%)Another Planned Perm Living Arrangement 7 12 8 161 188 (27%)Independent Living 0 0 1 2 3 (.2%)Reunification 11 16 1 13 41 (5.7%)Long Term Licensed Custody 1 9 6 101 117 (16.5%)Long Term Relative Custody 1 1 1 5 8 (1%)None 0 0 0 2 2 (.2%)Permanent Guardianship 1 1 0 2 4 (.5%)Permanent Placement w/relative 0 0 0 1 1 (0%)Other 0 0 0 7 7 (.5%)Total 29 72 46 562 709 100%(%) (4%) (10%) (7%) (79%)Length of stay for children achieving permanencyAdoption – by gender and length of stayLENGTH OF STAY- ADOPTION (in months)Gender 13-24 25-36 37-48 48 TotalFemale 2 1 10 13Male 4 5 9 18Total 2 4 6 19 31Emancipation – By gender and length of stayGenderYOUTHS - LENGTH OF STAY (in months)13-24 25-36 37-48 48 TotalFemale 1 8 1 60 70Male 2 5 4 50 61Total 3 13 5 110 131FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 16

Race of children reviewedBlack Hispanic2%Non-Hispanic White5%Multi-Racial1%Native American1%Unknown1%White Hispanic22%Non-Hispanic Black68%Delinquency history for children reviewedChildren Reviewed = 709RACE FEMALE MALE TOTALNon-Hispanic Black 95 116 211Non-Hispanic White 3 13 16Black Hispanic 3 6 9White Hispanic 17 28 45Multi-Racial 5 2 7TOTAL 123 165 288(%) 17% 23% 40%Children with historyof delinquency = 288(40%)Entry into foster care (n = 709)Abandonment12%Abuse-Physical11%Abuse-Sexual3%Ne glect43%Ris k of Harm31%FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 17

CHILDREN WITH SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS (n = 709)Special Education Type 0-5 6-12 13-17+ SumAutistic 0 3 6 9Developmentally delayed 0 2 0 2Dual sensory impaired 0 0 1 1Educable mentally handicapped 0 5 23 28Emotionally handicapped 2 18 66 86Gifted 0 0 1 1Health impaired 0 1 0 1Language impaired 0 1 0 1None 0 2 0 2Orthopeadically impaired 0 1 4 5Other 0 1 2 3Profoundly mentally handicapped 1 2 17 19Severely emotionally disturbed 0 17 61 78Specific learning disabled 0 13 47 60Speech therapy 1 3 1 5Trainable mentally handicapped 0 1 3 4Unknown 0 1 0 1Visually impaired 0 0 1 1TOTAL 3 71 233 307(1%) (23%) (76%) (43%)Children living in inappropriate placementsFor 2007, 15% of the children reviewed (108), were found to be in placementswith issues that affected their safety, well being and permanency.Placement Not AppropriateAGENCY745 Children 709 ChildrenReviewed Reviewed2006 % 2007 %CFCE 33 (4%) 18 (3%)CHARLEE 55 (7%) 36 (5%)CHS 25 (3%) 14 (2%)FRC 18 (2%) 2 (2%)HHCH 19 (3%) 11 (2%)KHU 23 (3%) 15 (2%)NTF 17 (2%) 12 (2%)TOTAL 173 (19%) 108 (15%)Placement concerns‣ Safety of child cannot be assured (includes61 runaway children) (67 children)‣ Placement is not a step towardspermanency (32 children)‣ Placement does not meet emotional needs(23 children)‣ Placement does not meet educational needs(13 children)‣ Placement does not meet physical needs (7children)‣ Placement is interfering with permanency(2 children)‣ Child is subject to abuse by another child inthe placement (3 children)FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 18

Child PlacementType of Placement2006 2007Children % Children %Adult Jail 1 (0.1%) 3 (0.2%)Detention 17 (1.2%) 9 (1.0%)Foster Home 731 (54.6%) 656 (50.0%)Group Home or Therapeutic Group Home 205 (15.3%) 190 (14.0%)Juvenile Justice Facility 4 (0.3%) 9 (1.0%)Medical Foster Home 87 (7.0%) 90 (7.0%)Non-relative custodian (Not Licensed) 3 (0.2%) 2 (0.2%)Other 0 (0%) 14 (1.0%)Pre-adoptive Parent 15 (1.1%) 40 (3.0%)Psychiatric Residential Treatment Facility 21 (1.5%) 22 (2.0%)Relative - Licensed Foster Home 2 (0.1%) 1 (0.1%)Relative (Not Licensed) 4 (0.3%) 3 (0.1%)Relative Caregiver Program 0 (0%) 2 (0.1%)Residential Facility 32 (2.3%) 38 (3.0%)Runaway Status 49 (3.6%) 61 (5.0%)Shelter 43 (3.2%) 43 (3.0%)Subsidized Ind. Living under 18 yrs of age 2 (0.1%) 5 (0.3%)Therapeutic Foster Home 122 (9.1%) 113 (9.0%)1338 (100%) 1301 (100%)FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 19

V. THE END OF THE JOURNEY: INDEPENDENT LIVINGThe key to a successful transition to adulthood is ensuring that thechild has an education, housing, health and mental health services,the resources to maintain an adequate lifestyle and a connection toresponsible adults committed to support him or her during thetransition.‣ As stated previously, the great majority of children reviewed (75%) are ages13 to 17. Since the reality of these children is that many will age out of thesystem without getting adopted, it is critical that they receive the preparationthey need for a successful transition to adulthood.‣ The SAIL project – System Accountability for Independent Living—monitorsagency compliance with IL requirements of youth 16 and over. Five panelswere trained and designated to hear IL reviews, which were extended to onehour each. The FCR database was upgraded to allow the collection of dataregarding IL issues. Each youth was represented by a Guardian or Attorneyad litem, and special efforts were made to encourage youth participation.‣ FCR’s IL panels reviewed 278 youth ages 16 and 17—a total of 39% of allchildren reviewed in FY 2007. The panels found that the majority of youthwere being referred and assessed for independent living services. Compliancewith other requirements, however, was extremely poor. This includes youthparticipation in required case staffings and in independent living classes,information on extended jurisdiction, and others.‣ In addition to monitoring the provision of services, the panels inquired as tothe youths’ plans after foster care: Where will you live? Go to school? Whodo you know that can give you a hand? Sadly, sixty percent (65%) did nothave housing plans; 70% did not have plans for secondary education; and80% did not have an adult relationship that could help them during theirtransition.‣ The need for mental health treatment is another concern. Of the youth aboutto age out, 60% needed mental health treatment yet only 27% werereceiving the services.‣ As a way to have a stronger impact on service provision, FCR is expandingthe SAIL project to include all children ages 13 to 17, with the intent ofallowing additional time for the youth to receive the appropriate services andfor the agencies to make additional efforts to find the youth a permanenthome or personal connections to support their transition.‣ An increase in the youths’ participation at reviews was encouraging. Theirattendance improved by 36%, from 188 in 2006 to 196 in 2007. This wasdue to major efforts of FCR staff as well as Guardians ad litem to notify youthof their independent living reviews, a major objective of the SAIL project.FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 20

According to national judicial and bar associations involved in juvenile justice,participation at court hearings gives youth a sense of control over their lifeand helps them to understand the court process. It also makes the casemore real for the participants as well as the panels, and provides betterinformation to the court.‣ Without doubt, our community can do a better job of preparing foster youth.Youth who spend four or more years of their lives in foster care, havelearning disabilities, experience multiple moves, delinquency, and suffer fromemotional and behavior problems will also have a hard time as adults. Togive foster youth a chance to succeed, it requires thoughtful, deliberateplanning, sufficient time to execute the plan and, most importantly, thecombined efforts of foster care agencies and the entire community.Challenges for FY 2008‣ Share with system partners FCR data reports on IL reviews, with the goalof identifying ways to improve the independent living program.‣ Develop a youth outreach program to encourage youth to attend reviews.‣ Explore the feasibility of conducting administrative reviews of foster youthages 18 to 23 as a way to assess the effectiveness of the independentliving program.‣ Include all youth ages 13 to 17 in IL reviews.FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 21

Compliance with IL servicesIndependent Living (IL) Services 2006 % 2007 %Total Youths (16+) Reviewed 262 278Youth referred for Independent Living 204 78% 235 (85%)Youth assessed for Independent Living 197 75% 223 (80%)IL assessment filed with the Court 150 57% 181 (65%)Required Staffing held 178 (64%)Youth participates in the Staffing 161 (58%)IL Transitional Case Plan filed in Court 1 .4% 75 (27%)IL Services provided in accord. w/ Case Plan 91 (33%)90-day JR for 17 year old has taken place 45 (16%)Post 18 placement identified 1 .4% 78 (28%)RTI application submitted 18 (23%)RTI application approved 11 (4%)Informed on Extended Jurisdiction 61 (22%)Received completed copy of Needs Assessmnt 20 (7%)Has Medicaid 150 (54%)Has Social Security 183 (66%)Has Birth Certificate 200 (72%)Has a Florida ID 134 (48%)Transitional (IEP) 41 (15%)DS Client 30 (11%)Status of transitioning youthYouths reviewed =278Children with Children withadult plans forrelationship secondaryfor support at education at 1818 years yearsChildrenwith plansfor housingat 18 yearsBiological Parent 3 (1%) 0 (%) Need mental Receiving Specialhealth mental health educationalFoster Parent 18 (7%) 40 (14%)treatment? treatment? needs?Mentor/GAL 12 (4%) 0 (%) (#Yes) (#Yes)(#Yes)Relative 22 (8%) 15 (5%) 79 (60%) 35 (27%) 68 (52%)Independent 42 (15%)College 45 (16%)Vocational Training 20 (7%)High School 6 (2%)Other 15 (5%)55(20%)86 (31%) 97(35%)FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 22

VI. SYSTEM BARRIERS.Federal law provides for strict timelines to permanency. Due to multipleand complex reasons, however, children in Miami-Dade’s foster caresystem wait longer than most. Obstacles to their permanency mayrelate to legal issues, gaps in services or issues related to the childhimself.Compliance with Adoption and Safe Families Act‣ For FY 2007, the agencies’ compliance with case plan and reasonable effortsrequirements under the Adoption and Safe Families Act was 78%. The mostsignificant reasons for noncompliance include not completing tasks fromprevious orders; not making reasonable efforts toward permanency; andinadequate case management.Judicial Review Social Study Report (JRSSR)‣ Reviews are required by federal and state law at least every six monthsduring the child’s stay in foster care. Noncompliance with this requirementmay result in loss of federal funds. Most importantly, it delays the case foreveryone involved, especially the child.‣ FCR review specialists prepare for reviews by examining the history of thecase and the information available regarding the child since the last review.Most of this information is included in social study reports that are requiredto be filed with the court 72 hours before the review. Compliance with thepre-filing requirement, however, is a challenge for most agencies. In FY2007, social study reports were pre-filed for only 50% of the childrenreviewed.‣ It is important to note that panels will disregard the 72-hour requirement aslong as the report is filed with the Clerk’s office before the review hearing.This is done so that cases are not delayed, and to assist the state’scompliance with timeliness of reviews. In spite of this flexibility, 137 childrenhad their cases rescheduled due to the case manager’s failure to file a socialstudy report.Reset of cases‣ While 1887 children were scheduled for review, only 1293 children wereactually reviewed by FCR panels. Some cases of children are taken off thedocket when the child is returned home; others are kept by the judges, whomay have particular reasons for keeping the case and then fail to re-set thecase before the panels.FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 23

‣ Of the children reviewed, 25% (331) had their cases reset for variousreasons: 12% was due to lack of proper notification by the Clerk’s Office;21% was due to the case manager’s failure to appear; and 41% was due tothe failure to file a JRSSR. As in past years, this was a great frustration forour citizen review panels, which sometimes spend hours in court waiting forthe next hearing. The children of course also wait.‣ The encouraging news, however, is that resets decreased from the previousyear—866 to 331. The high rate of resets in FY 2006 was due to thetransition to community based care.Barriers to adoption‣ According to FCR data, the main obstacles to adoption are related to thechild’s wellbeing and the lack of families willing to adopt. Another significantobstacle is the lack of information about adoption given to foster parents,relatives or even the child himself.‣ Sometimes the children are the obstacle: they do not want to be adopted forfear of betraying their families. There are other fears: a name change,maintaining contact with siblings, or the fear no one will want to adopt himor her. This “fear” is not always explored with the child.‣ Older youth, especially if they have learning, medical, mental health issuesor a history of delinquency, have difficulty getting adopted. Also, the longerthe stay in foster care the greater the problem, as emotional issues mayworsen as the children get older.‣ Sometimes, when efforts are made to place children with relatives, such asgrandparents, the relatives are too frail to care for the children, resulting intheir return to foster care. Sometimes the siblings have to be separated—one goes home and the other stays. Others run away.‣ Clear communication about adoption is critical. Some caretakers are afraidto adopt for fear of the child losing benefits; others are never approached.“After having stated that she didn’t want to be adopted for the pastseveral years, Jennifer, 15, reported to the panel that she was beingadopted. Jennifer recruited her own adoptive parent. Her mother’s bestfriend was more than thrilled to take her as her own, but no one had everasked her, and she did not know it was an option.”Issues with case management‣ Many of the case managers who come to reviews are new and have not hadtime to study their cases. Some do not know how to prepare for the review.Back-up documentation from health, mental health or educationprofessionals is often missing.FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 24

‣ When cases managers have not had training related to judicial review, it isimportant that supervisors come to the reviews so that panels have theinformation necessary to make sound recommendations to the court.‣ Turnover of case managers also has an impact on a child’s permanency.Sometimes in the transition important issues suffer from lack of attention:“In one of our cases, the agency had been court-ordered to ensure thatthe child receive treatment for a hernia. The surgery was delayed for twoyears because of the turnover of case managers: the information just didnot trickle down. In the same case, a sibling had been with a fosterparent for two years. The foster parents, who had filled out anapplication to adopt, never heard back from the case manager about theadoption.”Gaps in services‣ Adoptive families. There are more children waiting to be adopted than thereare pre- adoptive families. This is truer for teens. While 55% of thechildren reviewed had a goal of adoption, only 4% were living in pre-adoptivehomes and only 31 were actually adopted.‣ Dental care. One of the most frequent recommended orders this past yearwas dental services. Case managers report having significant issues with thenew insurance provider ADI. They report that there is a delay in authorizingservices if the child moves to a different home and in locating dentists in thearea that accept ADI.‣ Tutoring. Panels consistently order tutoring for children that are strugglingacademically in school. Yet this is a panel recommendation that is oftendisregarded. Many foster children fail the FCAT; many are held back inschool. Some children who do receive tutoring still have problems in school.There is no doubt that education is critical to a successful outcome for mostof these children. Educational evaluation and services to foster childrenshould remain a top priority.FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 25

SYSTEM BARRIERSAgency compliance with Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) = 78%AgencyASFA ComplianceChildrenreviewedASFACompliance%CFCE 131 101 77%CHARLEE 201 167 83%CHS 101 82 81%FRC 23 18 78%HHCH 33 28 85%KHU 133 98 74%NTF 87 61 70%Total/Ave. 709 555 78%Reasons for ASFA noncompliance:‣ No case plan was in effect (42);‣ Tasks from previous orders were notcompleted (84);‣ No reasonable efforts were made to reunifythe family (3);‣ No reasonable efforts to place the childinto a permanent placement (75);‣ Did not make reasonable efforts to assureall court order visitation occurs (7),‣ Case management was inadequate (73);‣ Case manager did not perform tasks asstated in the case plan (38).Note: More than one reason may be selectedfor each child.Children for whom a social study report (JRSSR) was timely filed = 50%COMPLIANCE - JRSSR Prefiling2006 2007# Child # Yes % # Child # Yes %CFCE 237 79 34% 242 138 58%CHARLEE 345 134 39% 380 188 50%CHS 209 59 29% 189 67 36%FRC 24 12 50% 38 14 37%HHCH 93 34 37% 59 34 58%KHU 288 104 37% 249 81 33%NTF 136 48 36% 136 125 92%Total/Ave. 1332 470 35% 1293 647 50%FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 26

Children whose cases were reset (by judicial division) = 47%Children whose cases were reset (by agency) = 47%Children’s cases reset# children Resets %CFCE 131 50 (38%)CHARLEE 201 104 (52%)CHS 101 45 (42%)FRC 23 7 (30%)HHCH 33 11 (33%)KHU 133 72 (54%)NTF 87 42 (48%)Total 709 331 (47%)Reasons for ResetsREASONS FOR RESETSA.40B.70C.137D.1 E.3 F.38 G.3H.8I.41A. Failure to notifyB. Case Mgr did not appearC. No JRSSRD. Case Mgr refused toproceed w/o DCFE. Parent refused to proceedw/o attorneyF. Provider agency requestedG. Scheduling errorH. Scheduling conflictI. Reset - otherFCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 27

VII.2007 CITIZEN REVIEW PANEL RECOMMENDATIONSA. JRSSR. Community based care agencies should enforce the requirementto file the social study report at least 72 hours before the review. In2007, social study reports were timely filed for only 50% of the childrenreviewed. This often results in case delays and lack of progress in a case.B. Resets. Community based care agencies should have a central point formonitoring court hearings and ensuring the attendance of case managers.For 2007, 137 children had their cases rescheduled due to the casemanager’s failure to appear.C. Supervision of cases. When case managers are not familiar with thecase, their supervisor should attend the review. Many cases must berescheduled when the case manager is not prepared and cannot presentinformation to the panels. In addition, there should be better supervisionregarding compliance with case plans. Compliance with orders fromprevious reviews is also an issue.D. Youth participation at reviews. Community based care agenciesshould notify foster youth of reviews, and encourage their attendance.Youth attendance is also encouraged by the courts. Many youth however,do not attend due to lack of notice or lack of transportation to reviews.E. Disproportionality of Black children in foster care. As beforementioned,this is national issue that is receiving much attention andabout which there are recent studies. There should be more awarenessand training provided on this issue.F. Independent Living services. Only 33% of youth reviewed participatedin Il services in accordance with their case plan. Given the findings fromour reviews, these services should be a priority. Youth need to beinvolved in their case plans and encouraged to participate in IL services.G. Reviews of youth ages 18 to 23. Once a youth reaches 18, he isoutside the jurisdiction of the Juvenile Court. Consequently, there are noreviews and there’s little information available regarding their status andthe effectiveness of the independent living program. The Departmentshould explore ways to monitor youth who have aged out of care.H. Adoption. It is important to talk to foster parents, relatives and childrenabout adoption. More than once. Children and youth need to beprepared for adoption. Older youth who do not want to be adopted oftenchange their mind when adoption is explained. Adoption is not aboutbabies or about adoptive parents replacing birth parents.FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 28

VIII. HISTORY AND PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONOur HistoryIn 1988, the United Way of Miami spearheaded a unique initiative to address theproblems in the foster care system. A task force of 150 civic leaders, mobilizedto explore strategies for long-term improvements to the system, recommendedthe implementation of citizen review of foster care cases—a program in whichcitizens are trained to serve as independent, third-party reviewers andadvocates for youth in the foster care system. The concept combines the needto help the courts with system oversight and the need for communityinvolvement in the foster care system. Florida Foster Care Review Project, Inc.was created in 1989. The next year, the Florida Legislature enacted legislationthat authorized citizen review panels to participate in the review process.The name of the organization was changed in 1998 to Foster Care Review, Inc.(FCR). FCR, one of three existing programs in the State, has grown into anorganization of 23 staff and 110+ volunteers. FCR’s $1.6 million budget (2007)comes from the State of Florida, The Children’s Trust, North Dade MedicalFoundation, United Way of Miami-Dade, and private grants and contributions.Statutory authorityIn 1980, Congress enacted Public Law 96-272, the Adoption Assistance andChild Welfare Act. This landmark legislation, the foundation for the currentchild welfare system, placed significant responsibility on the courts to reviewchild welfare cases on a regular basis, and required States to make reasonableefforts towards permanency. Since then, many States have elected toimplement citizen review panels to assist the courts with the increasingdemands in monitoring of children.Almost 20 years later, the Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) made evenmore progressive changes by shortening timeframes for permanency andfocusing on safety, wellbeing of the child and adoption. ASFA also establishedperformance standards and a state accountability system, whereby states facefinancial penalties for failure to demonstrate improvements in child outcomes.FCR assists the State’s compliance with these federal statutes by conductingcase reviews of children, making judicial determinations of reasonable efforts,and by tracking agency compliance with ASFA.The Florida citizen review enabling legislation is found at F. S. 39.701 and39.702. Section 701 provides the requirements for conducting a judicial reviewby a court or citizen review panel, and section 702 outlines the requirements foradministering the program.Judicial Reviews of Children by Citizen Review PanelsF.S. 39.701 requires a judicial review at least every six month for each child inthe dependency system. The purpose of the review is to monitor the child’ssafety, wellbeing and progress towards permanency. After each review, theFCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 29

panels make recommendations to the Juvenile Court based on the informationprovided at the review. By law, these are limited to the dispositional optionsavailable to the court: to return the child to the parent, continue the child in outof home care for a specified period of time, or initiate termination of parentalrights for subsequent placement in an adoptive home. Any party objecting tothe panel’s findings and recommended orders may request an exception hearingbefore the court.Review hearings are set by the Clerk of the 11th Judicial Circuit Court on thefifth and tenth month after the child enters foster care. A permanency hearingis scheduled on the twelfth month before the Court. Each of FCR’s 18 citizenreview panels meets one day per month to conduct 10 to 12 reviews, whichgenerally take approximately 40 minutes, depending on the number of childrenin a case. Hearings are held 18 days out of the month at the Citizen ReviewCourtroom located on the grounds of the Juvenile Justice Center. Staff supportis provided by FCR review specialists, who compile the documentation forreview, facilitate the review process, enter individual case information into theFCR database, and prepare the findings and recommendations submitted to theCourt for approval.In 2005, FCR began to hold special reviews of youth ages 16 and over to ensurethat they were being prepared for independent living. Five panels were trainedto hear these reviews, which can last one hour or more. Starting in 2008, allchildren ages 13 and over will be included in this project.The review serves as a barometer of case management, continually stimulatingprogress and improvements to ensure that needed services are provided, thatthe child is appropriately and safely placed and that the tasks identified in thecase plan are being performed. Upon suspicion of risk to a child, or in the eventof serious noncompliance with orders, the citizen review panels request a postjudicialreview before the Court for immediate judicial action.Data Collection and ReportingFCR’s database was designed in 1999 and developed with input from childwelfare system partners. It serves multiple functions: the tracking of individualcase information, the production of reports and recommended orders on eachcase, and the production of summary reports with aggregate data. Withassistance from the Children’s Trust, FCR’s database will be upgraded in 2008.The review process provides a unique source for quantitative and qualitativeinformation regarding children in foster care—information not readily availablethrough any other mechanism. Review data can assist in identifying the needsof children as well as critical information in making sound policy, funding, andplanning decisions for individual children and groups of children.Once customized to perform system level tracking, FCR reports can be used asquality assurance tools by public and private child welfare agencies, the JuvenileCourts, the Legislature and others to improve practice and develop responsivepolicies and budgets. The results are better decisions, better compliance withFCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 30

federal and state laws and improved outcomes for children in the foster caresystem. FCR data reports can:• Monitor the extent to which policy and practice are being implementedaccording to laws, regulations and expectations in a timely fashion;• Determine compliance with the requirements of the Adoption and SafeFamilies Act (ASFA), monitoring case by case the safety and well being ofchildren in care, their progress toward permanency, and timeframes forpermanency decision-making;• Monitor casework performance to determine if reasonable efforts andcritical casework activities are occurring timely and in accordance withfederal and state laws and local standards and expectations;• Inform decision-makers about potential case and systemic problems; and• Hold agencies and professionals accountable for the care and treatment ofchildren by monitoring quality and delivery of services.Volunteer TrainingQuality citizen reviews depend on FCR volunteers that are highly knowledgeableof the foster care system and statutory requirements, including areas of childdevelopment, substance abuse, mental health, case management, courtprocess, and community resources. Volunteers must also be culturallyresponsive during their work at review hearings, and must know how to buildtrust and engage the meaningful participation of foster children and theirfamilies.FCR volunteers are required to attend 25 hours of pre-service training beforethey can participate in a citizen review panel. In addition, all volunteers mustattend a minimum of 10 hours of continuing education. Training of volunteers isa collaborative effort that involves FCR staff, local child abuse experts, fosterparents, DCF, the Guardian ad Litem Program, and private child welfareagencies.Florida’s Citizen Review ProgramsOne of the statutory mandates in the citizen review legislation is “to ensureconsistency of operations of citizen review programs throughout the State.” Tothat end, the Florida Association of Citizen Review for Dependent Children(FACRDC), a nonprofit organization, was created in the year 2000 by thedirectors of the different programs throughout the State.The role of the state association is to promote citizen review statewide, toensure consistency of operations, and to provide technical assistance todeveloping programs. The association has developed uniform standards ofoperation and data collection.From the creation of FCR in 1989, Florida’s citizen review programs experiencedsignificant growth. In 1999, a report written by the Office of the State CourtsAdministrator to the House Committee on Family Law and Children reported 10programs that were either operating or in the start-up process: Charlotte,FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 31

Collier, Miami-Dade, Duval, Hernando, Lee, Manatee, Marion, Palm Beach, andPolk Counties. Six of these programs received funds from the Florida Legislaturein FY 2000-2001: Duval, Hernando, Manatee, Marion, Miami-Dade and PalmBeach counties. Since that time, several of the programs closed due to lack ofsupport from their community, the legislature or the judiciary. The onlyprograms currently operating are in Miami-Dade, Manatee and Collier counties.National Foster Care Review CoalitionA national association of citizen review programs, National Foster Care ReviewCoalition, was created in 2006 to promote the use of citizen review programsnationwide. The association is working on a uniform data collection tool andtraining materials for programs. In addition, they are working with theChildren’s Bureau and national child advocacy foundations to explore ways thatthe program can assist the Child and Families Services Reviews (CFSR).FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 32

IX. BOARD OF DIRECTORS – January 2007President of the BoardChristopher M. Hutchins, CPA -Certified Public Accountant, Berenfeld,Spritzer, Shechter & Sheer, P.A.Adoptive Parent. (2001)Past PresidentMichael A. Samway, Esq. – DeputyGeneral Counsel, YAHOO! Inc. (1998)Vice PresidentKatherine W. Exell, Esq. – Attorney,Podhurst Orseck Josefsberg EatonMeadow Olin & Perwin, P.A. Childadvocate (2002)TreasurerBrian F. Misiunas – Certified PublicAccountant for Pinchasik, Strongin,Muskat, Stein & Co (2005)SecretaryMayda Prego, Esq. Attorney, ChevronProducts Company (2004)David S. Mandel, Esq. - Partner, Mandel& Mandel LLP (1997)Barbara Rostov - Retired SocialWorker. FCR volunteer since 1990(2003)Stephanie A. Russo, Esq. – Attorney,Broad and Cassel (2007)Dannaliz Segrera. – Owner, PhotoOffset an Impressions of Miami (2007)Barbara Thomlison, Ph.D. - Professor,School of Social Work, & Director,Institute for Children & Families at Risk,Florida International University (2002)Shari A. Witkoff, M.D.M. – Dentist;community volunteer (2004)Allen Benowitz – President, WorldwideVideoconferencing (2004)Abby Cynamon, Esq. – Attorney,Eleventh Judicial Circuit Court (2007)Executive DirectorAna Maria Pozo, JD - (2001)David A. Duckenfield – The BalseraCommunications Group (2001)Marlin Ebbert – Community Volunteer(2007)Markenzy Lapointe – Attorney, Boies,Schiller & Flexner (2003)Jason Liberty. – Vice President, Audit,Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines (2007)MaryAnne Lukacs – GeneralMagistrate, Family Court. FCR volunteerfor 10 years. (2005)FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 33

X. VOLUNTEERSLinda AbramsMagaly AlvarezAlexandra BaenaWinda BaldwinBarbara BargmanJorge BargmanBetty BarriosJudy BashThelma BergCarol BurnsteinWendy BolzFredericka BrownSteven ButlerDoris CapriCaridad CastroSol CenterBillie DiamondWalter DorfmanJan DraperRoberta EhrenreichMaria FletcherPeter ForrestMartha GarciaJudy GenaoBruce GilesEvelyn GreyAmy HalseyClaudia HauriDenise HayeLinda HertzAlberta HortonEdith HudsonPeggy HudsonAndrea HuesonDorothy IsrielRuby JacobMary JessieNadine JohnsonRenee JonesRobert JonesSharon JonesClaire JordiEllen KannerNancy KatzoffHerman KlemickPriscilla KlomparensMargaret KunitzLaura LazopoulousEssie LeeMaritza LeraDaniel LomorielloPauline LowePatricia MarxGloria McDanielGenovev MendozaMichael MiltonBrandhilda MooreFrances MooreGail NansenInes NeuhausDulce NogueraZoila Perez ChanquetDianne PetersonLisa PittmanCamilla PonticorvoCathy PraiserJonathan ReidiOscar ResekRonald RiversRobert RosenBarbara RostovJudith SalazarSue SamuelsBarbara SangettiSheree SavarMichael ScherWendy SejourDanielle SelemJoan SmithNancy SpencerMark SteelAnn SwanerIrene ThawNita ThomasBetty TibbettsJiska TimmerClaire WarrenMadge WarrenAntonette WashingtonJudy WebbGlenda WhatleyAnita YoungkinStanley ZamorFCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 34

FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 35

WE PRAY FOR CHILDRENWe pray for childrenwho sneak popsicles before supper,who erase holes in math workbooks,who can never find their shoes.And we pray for thosewho stare at photographers from behindbarbed wire, who can't bounce down thestreet in a new pair of sneakers, who never"counted potatoes,"who are born in places we wouldn't becaught dead, who never go to the circus,who live in an X-rated world.We pray for childrenwho bring us sticky kisses and fistfuls ofdandelions, who hug us in a hurry andforget their lunch money.And we pray for those who never getdessert, who have no safe blanket to dragbehind them, who watch their parentswatch them die, who can't find any breadto steal, who don't have any rooms to cleanup, whose pictures aren't on anybody'sdresser, whose monsters are real.And we pray for thosewhose nightmares come in the daytime,who will eat anything,who have never seen a dentist,who aren't spoiled by anybody,who go to bed hungry and cry themselvesto sleep, who live and move, but have nobeing.We pray for children who want to becarried and for those who must, for thosewe never give up on and for those whodon't get a second chance.For those we smother with love,and for those who will grab the hand ofanybody kind enough to offer it.(Anonymous)We pray for childrenwho spend all their allowance beforeTuesday, who throw tantrums in thegrocery store and pick at their food, wholike ghost stories, who shove dirty clothesunder the bed, and never rinse out the tub,who get visits from the tooth fairy, whodon't like to be kissed in front of thecarpool, who squirm in church and screamin the phone, whose tears we sometimeslaugh at and whose smiles can make uscry.FCR Annual Report FY 2006-2007 36

State of FloridaDepartment of Children and FamiliesCharlie GristGovernorRobert A. ButtenrorthSecretaryJune 10,2008Judy Groos, Executive DirectorCitizen's Foster Care Review Board lnc.Collier County Courthouse3301 Tamiami Trail East, Bldg LNaples, Florida 34112Re: The 2007 Annual Citizen Review ReportDear Ms. Groos:Thank you foi your continuous commitment to improving Florida's child protection system.Please let your board and panel members know that the work you do provides criticalinsights into the system of care in Collier county, as well as child protection trends acrossFlorida.I am in receipt of the 2007 Citizens Foster Care Review Board annual report and will sharethis report with Department of Children and Families (DCF) Suncoast RegionalAdministrator, Circuit 20 Circuit Administrator, and the Chief Executive Officer forChildren's Network of Southwest Florida.I look fonruard to continued collaboration. lf you have any questions, please feel free tocontact Mukweso Mwenene at (850) 922-0510 or Mukweso_Mwenene@dcf.state.fl.us.Sincerely,(rn^tU,tt;Patricia A. BadlandDirectorOffice of Family Safetycc:Nick Cox, Region Director, Suncoast RegionCookie Coleman, Circuit Administrator, DCF Circuit 20Nadereh salim, cEo, children's Network of southwest Frorida's1317 Winewood Boulevard, Tattahassee, Florida 32399-0700Mission: Protect the Vulnerable, Promote Strong and Economically Self-Sufficient Families, andAdvance Personal and Family Recovery and Resiliency

Citizen's Foster Care Review Board Inc.Collier Countv FloridaBoard of DirectorsAnnual MeetingFebruarv 28. 20083301 E. Tamiami Trail - Naples FL 34112(239) 2s2-2740(239) 774-9654 faxjgroos@ca.cjis20.org

March,2008EXECUTIVE SUMMARYCase Activitv:There were no significant differences between the cases in 2007 and in recent years.. The number of cases heard by CFCRB was down for the fourth straight yearo Substance abuse remains the primary reason for children entering thedependency systemo Judicial reviews were well attended by all parties. Guardians ad Litem (GALs) were assigned on a greater percentage of cases. Continuanceswere required onTo/of cases. Three objections were filed to recommendations of the panel (less than 1%)Gommunications and Coordination :Our Executive Director (ED) and several board memberspent a great deal of timeworking to improve communications. Quarterly Dependency Group meetings werescheduled, attended by, and memorialized in writing by our ED. All parties weresolicited for agenda items and issues were discussed with input freely given by all.These meetings were held January 23, May 3, August 30, and November 8, and havecontinued into 2008.ln early 2007, separate meetings were scheduled with Radha Srinivasan, DCF/ChildWelfare Legal Services; MaryAnn Savage, Family Preservation Services/ProgramDirector; and George Glatt, DCF/Collier Operations Program Administrator to work onimproving the coordination between all parties. We, along with other representativesfrom the Collier Dependency Group met with Nick Cox, DCF RegionalDirector/Suncoast Region and Cookie Coleman, District 8 Administrator on 1119107tomake them aware of the Citizen Review Panel in Collier County and to expressconcerns about problems with DCF and its partners. Throughout the year, Judge KeithKyle provided encouragement to all parties to attend meetings and work together tosolve problems.Schedulinq:Petitions and cite sheets have not been consistently submitted in a timely manner,resultingparties not being properly noticed and causing last minute docket changes.This was a major frustration during 2007 and continues into 2008. These documentsneed to be in the hands of the Collier County Clerk of Courts no later than 10 daysbefore the scheduled Judicial Review. In addition, when a future JR date is establishedat the current JR, and parties are given notice, it is imperative that the case be heard onthat day and not rescheduled. lt appears that coordination between FPS and DCF Legalneeds improvement. We are hopeful that the issue has been raised and is now fullyunderstood by all, so that this can be resolved.

Volunteers:During calendar 2007 in-service training was offered on the following subjects:February - ProfessionalismMarch - DCF/Quality Assurance ManagementApril- Dependency Law (Parent Counsel made presentation. DCF Counsel wasunwilling to participate)May - Understanding Comprehensive Behavioral Health AssessmentsOctober - The Hotline ProcessNovember - Update with panel members on taking notes and formulatingrecommendationsPanel members must attend at least four in-service training sessions per year (6 hoursminimum) to maintain their status as active panel members. We welcomed four newpanef members in 2007 and another four in early 2008. New members were sworn inon February 1,2008 by the Honorable Keith Kyle. Total volunteers now number 26.Ghallenqes:1.) Expenses:We are told that all Florida agencies will be forced to maintain or reduce expenses. Weplay an important role in maintaining expenses with our nearly all-volunteerorganization. lt is impossible to estimate what the cost might be for additionaljudges ormagistrates if not for the CFCRB. We conservatively estimate the value of these in-kindvolunteer hours at $40,000 to $50,000 per year.With our volunteers we are also able to spend as much time reviewing a case as isdictated by the facts and testimony. Volunteers read the social studi6s and GALreports in advance. Updates and testimony of the parties are heard during the judicialreview. ln 2007 the average review lasted 23 minutes. The most time consuming casetook 62 minutes, and some cases took as litile as five minutes.2.) Gase Manaqement Recommendations:Frequent turnover and fragmented communications with DCF and its partner agenciesc€uses delays in getting case plans approved and parents commencing work on tasks.We are often conducting the five month judicial review with asses*r"nls not completed,recommendations not available, and very little progress to report. We believe that agreater sense of urgency must be conveyed to all parties. Piompt development of caseplans with clearly defined tasks and measurements are needed, so that parentsunderstand what they must do to successfully complete their case. We also needprompt, effective referrals and timely follow-up to be sure the parties are in compliance.Since so many cases involve substance abuse, we must get assessments done withtreatment commencing as quickly as possible. we also need to start early in the casewith random screens at leastwice monthly so that relapses can be carght early in thecase with interventions occurring well before the case approaches permanency.

We believe that delays and continuances can also be reduced if DCF and/or its partnerscould verify and document that parents are notified of their righto counsel early in thecase, allowing eligible parents to make timely application for court appointed counsel.Apparent misunderstandings are often the cause of delays and continuances.3.) Reduction in Number of Gases:In the Executive Summary that accompanied last year's (2006) annual report, weexpressed concern abouthe apparent number of complaints that resulted in DCFoffering voluntary services with no follow-up. Unless there are subsequent complaintsthat warrant intervention, no case is ever created. Conceptually, it is a good thing forfamilies to solve their problems without becoming part of the "system". However, wewould recommend that "preventive" services be offered rather than "voluntary". In thisway, follow-up could be built into the system so that a review is made after a reasonableperiod of time (three to six months) to be sure that referrals are acted upon and that allreasonable steps have been taken to assure the safety of the children.4.) Independent Livinq:Teenagers often languish in the system, then age out with little preparation for thefuture. Chifdren who are not in licensed foster care are not eliqible rg for services toprepare them for adulthood. In Collier County most teenagers who are not medicallyneedy live with relatives or non-relatives in unlicensed care. As a result, they rr. noteligible for independent living training classes, scholarships, or subsidized livingexpenses. A collaboration of concerned citizens from CFCRB, GAL, Foster CareCouncil of SW Florida, Children's Home Society, Children's Network, and Voices forKids was assembled in 20OT to look for ways to provide assistance to these youngsters.We are seeking private funding and hope to make limited services avaitable in 2008.5.) Politics:f n late 2007 and continuing into 2008 we have been "under attack" by DCF. Collier isthe only county in the circuit to have a citizen review board and this may be the reasonthat DCF would prefer that we not exist. We have been criticized and some panelmembers ridiculed in an apparent attempto discredit the CFCRB. We believe onbalancethe children in Collier County benefit from having involved, committed citizensreviewing the work of State agencies and their partners. DCF and its contractedagencies have undergone tremendous changes in the past three years. Turnover ofcase managers, protective investigators and child welfare legaf representatives remainsa major concern. we have a common interest in protecting tne children of collierCounty and we will continue to work on communications and coordination with allparties.6.) Diversitv:We have been criticized because the racial or ethnic make-up of our volunteer panels isnot representative of the. community. Currently only two of our twenty-six volunteers aremembers of racial minority groups. We acknowledge this as a problem and welcomeinput and suggestions. In 2005 we established an informal speaker's bureau and wehave sought opportunities to improve community awareness and recruit new volunteers.

We will continue these efforts. Volunteers must be available for four to five hours onone or more Wednesdays per month. Additional time is needed to prepare for judicialreviews and to attend in-service training. Unfortunately, this eliminates many workingpeople and reduces the pool from which we can attract new volunteers.7.) Gonflict Gounsel:The change from appointed private attorneys to representation through the publicDefender's office has just taken place as of January, 2008. Currenl/this is seen as achallgnge only because it is one more change in a system that has had very litlestability in the past three years. We are also aware inat an appeal has been filed and,depending on the result, additional organizational and/or operational changes mayoccur.99TT-"lts regarding lhis report should be directed to Judy Groos, ExecutiveCFCRB by mail at 3301 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, FLg4112, by pnon"Director,to 23g-252-2740, or by email to Jqroos@ca.ciis2O.orq

2007 - 2008 CFCRB Board of DirectorsFran KieselhorstEdward Ferguson, Ph.D.Raquel Gonzales, M.S.W., L.C.S.WWillie West , BS., MSNStanley AppelbaumRussell W. GroosSuzanne Lanier, JDKath4m Lieb Hunter, B.S.W., C.D.V.F.Veora Little, CRNAPresidentVice PresidentTreasurerSecretaryDirectorDirectorDirectorDirectorDirector

2OO7 - 2OO8 STEERING COMMITTEE MEMBERSMemberAppointmentDateStan Appelbaum 9t15t05 JBob Bosle 9trst05 4Ed Bransilver I/1t07 7Jan Eustis r0t18/07 l0LizHayes 9/2003 IFran Kieselhorst 4n9/07 9Richard Meadows n/2004 2Rob Nossen L/t/07 8Susan Rutherford 10/2006 6Willie West 9t15tjs 5Order to Rotate

00002DEPARTMENTOf REVENUE85-8012541482C-4Certificate NumberThis certifies thatConsumer's Certificate of Exemptionlssued Pursuant to Chapter 212, Florida StatutesEffectiveDR-14R.04/0502127107CITIZENS FOSTER CARE REVIEW BOARD INC33O I TAMIAMI TRL E BLDG LNAPLES FL 341 12-3974llEtlrilrl\)i'{/zt\f I/3i'A,i''iis.)Ilmportant Information for Exempt OrganizationsDR-14R.04/052.3.5.6.You must provide all vendors and suppliers with an exemption certificate before making tax-exempt purchases.See Rule 12A-1.038, Ftorida Administrative Code (FAC).Your Consumer's ceftificate of Exemption is to be used solely by your organization for your organization,scustomary nonprof it activities.Purchases made by an individual on behalf of the organization are taxable, even if the individual willreimbursedbeby the organization.This exemption applies only to purchases your organization makes. The sale or lease to others by yourorganization of tangible personal property, sleeping accommodations or other real property is taxabie. yourorganization must register, and collect and remit siles and use tax on such taxable transactions. Note:are exemptChurcnesfrom this requirement except when they are the lessor of real property (Rule 12A-1.070, FAc).It is a criminal otfense to fraudulently presenthis certificate to evade the payment of sates tax.circumstancesunder noshould this certificate be used for the personal benefit of any individual. Violatorspaymentwill be liableofforthe sales tax plus a penalty of 200% of the tax, and may be subject to conviction offelony.a thirdAnydegreeviolation will necessitate the revocation of this cenificate.lf you have questions regarding your exemption cedificate, please contacl the Exemption Unit of CentralRegistration850-487'4130. The mailing address is PO BOX 64g0, Tallahassee, FL 32314-6480.

Citizen's Foster Care Review BoardBoard Of Directors Annual MeetinsFebruary 28,2008CALL TO ORDERMINUTESOLD BUSINESS1) General update on Collier Dependency System2) Financial UpdateNEW BUSINESS1) Statistics/Financial Review2) Teen Task Force3) Resignation of Suzanne Lanier4) Election of New Officers

-Citizen's Foster Care Review BoardGeneral Membership MeetingMinutes February 14, 2008.he general membership meeting was called to order by Fran Kieselhorst at 5:30Present: Ed Bransilver, Louise Dowd, Jan Eustis, Jean Gasvoda, David Goldstein, Russ Groos, Liz Hayes, FranKieselhorst, Richard Meadows, Susan Nordbeck, Rob Nossen, Joan Reynolds, Sue Rutherford, tisa Ware,Jennifer Weidenbruch, Willie West, Don White, Eileen WhiteProxy votes have been received by: Bob BogleAbsent: Terry Abraham-Whalley, Stan Appelbaum, Bob Bogle, Suzanne Meiners-Levy, Meryl Rorer, JenniferSchellLeave of Absence: Kay Jasso, Milt SokollCurrent Membership total is 26 Panel Volunteers - 2 though are on leave of absence for medical reasonswe had 18 voting members in attendance, plus 1 proxy vote, which representeci a quorum.Roll Call was called by Executive Director, Judy GroosThe minutes were read by Secretary Willie West.there were no reports from committeesThe primary purpose of the general membership meeting was to reaffirmBallotsmembersweretocirculatedthe Boardto eachofvotingDirectors.member present. Fran announced thatsubmittedSuzanneher resignation,Lanier recen'yso her name was stricken from the ballot.Fran KieselhorstEdward Ferguson, ph.D.Raquel Gonzalez, MSW, LMSWWillie West BS., MSNStan AppelbaumRussell GroosSuzanne+anierr=pKathryn Lieb-Hunter, BSW, CDVFVeora Little, CRNAThe vote was as follows:Fran Kieselhorst (19)Edward Ferguson, ph.D. (lg)Raquel Gonzalez,Msw, LMSW (lg)Willie West BS., MSN (tg)Stan Appelbaum (17)Russell Groos (1g)Suanne+anie++gKathryn Lieb-Hunter, BSW, CDVF (16)Veora Little, CRNA (lg)Additionally, 3 votes were case for Robfro Sue RutherfordNossen, 1 vote for Bob Bogle, 1 vote for Richard Meadows and I voteElection of officers will be held at the annual board of directors meeting on Februar y 2g,200g.Next General Membership Meeting _ Febru ary 19,2009

We adjoumed at 5:40 PM.).espectfully submitted,Willie West, Secretary

Citizen's Foster Care Review BoardGeneral Membership MeetingMinutes February lS, 2007The general membership meeting was called to order by Fran Kieselhorst at 5:35Present: Terry Abraham-Whalley, Stan Ap1Dowd, Leon Droll, Jan Eustis, Jean GasvodLizHayes, Fran Kieselhorst, Dennis LeffertGil Rashbaum, Sue Rutherford, Lisa Ware.Proxy votes have been received by: peter Kraley and Milt SokollAbsent: Bob Bogle, Fd Bransilver, peter Kraley, Susan Nordbeck, Ralph Segall, JamesSmith, Milton Sokoll, Lee yoshacurrent Active Membership total is 32 paner volunteers.we had 23 Yotingmembers in attendance, plus 2 proxy votes,quorum.which represented aThe primary purpose of the general membership meeting was toBoardelectof Directors.members toBallotsthewere circurated to ,u.r, uoiirrgThe-"-u"rvotepresent.was unanimous to elect the nominees to the Board of Directors.Fran KieselhorstEdward Ferguson, ph.D.Raquel Gowalez,Msw, LMSWWillie West BS., MSNStan AppelbaumRussell GroosSuzanne Lanier. JDKathryn Lieb_Hunter, BSW, CDVFVeora Little, CRNAElection of Officers will be held at the annual board of directors2007.meeting on February 22-Next General Membership Meeting _ Febru ary 21,200g.We adjourned at 5:40 pM.Respectfully submitted.Willie West, Secretarv

CFCRBAnnual Board of Directors MeetingMarch 8,2007MinutesPresent: Stan Appelbaum, Ed Ferguson, Raquel Gonzalez,Russ Groos, Fran Kieselhorst, Veora LittleAbsent: Suzanne Lanier, Kathryr Lieb-Hunter, Willie WestGuest: Judy GroosCall to OrderApproval of minutes from9:05 Fran.(Ed/Veora)Update on Meeting with Fran gave an update o" D.Monaco.o Scheduling issue appears to be resolved.o There is now a process to send a case to the judge withopanel representationWe have had a meeting with the chairs to discuJsoabou" pror.r,special cases will be_"red-flagged" *o uro,rgti;-M;;"*attention immediately.savage,sJudy will iollow up in one week for resolutions ervice held 2 / 15/ 07 to stress increased professionalism;#T'"ffi?fn-byBoardMembersStan will get infoformulate a specific list of questions.-sJa., will arrano p A rnecrinn,,;+L rr^^--qlu;; *"dJtffit:".ilHt":ueshons'Veora will contact C-stan will ananse a meeting with Georgef il"j';J::T,'."ii:::::::: yiy::' yl ll.,.^*l ;; il*"nt h as b een s t agn an rf,."r"ffi ;;:;,:,*."se,nodecrease.#;;rilffi ;#T:lilTi,:.il:ffi ffi:Russ will rp"ukExecutive SummaryElection of OfficeriTranslation ofhu"'""tStHand Stan will m""twitt C"o9!g!qop-{ - dilier5aFBoard Nl.mb"t-anrlinput soon, so the final can bg oa"rr"r.rl co-+ +^ r-+ a r_--.ve bylaws as reuisid: (V and sent to Ct. A{min and ihe iMotion to accept slate;a;ffi;.s asfollows:Fran(Stan/Russ)Kieselhorst - presidentEd Ferguson - Vice presidentRaquel Gonzalez- TreasurerXrillie West - Secwill contact Mto see how this is

Citizens Foster Care Review BoardExecutive Committee MeetingMay 10,20079:30 AMEd Ferguson, Judy Groos, Fran Kieselhorst, Wiltie WestThis was a special meeting called to discuss the recent new bill HB 70g3Legislaturefrom thethatFl.proposes a change in the way parents are represented in dependency:ted by January, the public defenders officeare concerned the effect this may have onft:'":::ilij:^rT:"r_ll :|!,0,J.0.,1.gefender has the authorityand hastothedetermineability towhat is best for:T:,i:r"rtrassign ;;il;;;ffi;"#;HT:; regrstry or privatepractice.The clerk of courts will determine indigency. Judy checkeda new applicationwith thebutclerktheyofdocourtsnot have-anyforinformationuittmonitor this i, time.situation, Judygetwillacontinuefinar oraft oftobil, unJ[..p'** *ro.*.a.Ed announced that Children,s Network received a one-time $400,000 allotment to fill"l':1*:tT';::#ltJudy also announced thatduties in Julv.:i,illffi:lltrmentar hearth or which thev wlr move izoo,oooa new ChiefJudge has beenappointed and will assume hiswe had a lengthy discussion about the In{eneldent Living program. utilized by qualifying children It isThis not beingmay ui ouebeingamade.*.ru-rawareproblems:ofth" progru*,-children-rtird."nare notdoof gettingno *""i,"to meetings:orend: childrenciilJren n"Jlnr"ntiveshave no waySalimto g;.--w.that there ishavelittlealsofundingbeenf"; ;+ir.. told byRoadMsstipendto tni"p.no"n..,,programfor those who are in "dster which paysandarelative.ontinu"'*iiiand non-relative.carg "are" their education. chirdren inoffered !o-1ot qualify forpriorilri, .rilr"rgr,to agingtheyoutcanat rattend8. w'rietherriiclassesthesetn"ric#;i.="ch'dren with theseb:Flqandinroo*toways of helpingthis ftourgms, E^Jand stan *"**^*"tmay haveLAca report.had(aicordingdone a study,"onst"r, was ever "i#;agenerated).list to Judv of last months children'sFir:#iff:.aNerwork statistics of kids in care and

Ed announced that the DCF building on Airport road will be closing. It is not knownwhere they will move.Judy will also start keeping statistics on the 15-18 year old children, tracking licensedcare, relative and non-relative care, and protective supervision for independJnt livingstatus.Judy will start tracking l5-18 year olds.We adjourned at l0:45 pM.

CFCRBBoard of Directors MeetingOctober 4,2007MinutesPresent: Ed Ferguson, Russ Groos, Fran Kieselhorst, Veora Little, Willie WestAbsent: Stan Appelbaum, Raquel Gonzalez, suzanne Lanier, Kathryn Lieb-HunterExecutive Direrctor: Judy GroosCall to OrderFinancial reportFundraisingMission StatementNew Meeting withDCF/CollierDependencyQuarterly DependencyMeeting ReportSome Suggestions toAddress JR Concems9:10 AM (FranEd/WillieJudy reported that we have about $have been minimal at about $260 for this year. It is felt that our goal should be$2,000 at all times in the treasurIn view of our limited funds, *, hJ-"dI that. the^Community3:..::::1 1:Tl :enortefFoundation wi'' gi ve grantsfor sp e ci fi c p rrpt,"r.w e c o ul d qur i ry"rol"# ilil;lffiH"Xl: :ffi fi l#and recorder when needed. we do not want to rely-on court smart for recordingof reviews. we have 3r volunteers but it was rettitratthey stroula not besolicited for funds. It was agreed that we would :o Do 50/50 lottery tickets at annual dinnero Ask steering committee to look into community resource such asStaples to solicit the supplies we need..l::iT:*:iy:tli: from rrinity by the cove to see what we vv v might rrrrSlrL be ugable to request from their granting prtgru-. (Judy emailedandsusancalledi0/4/07hef I2/l g/07 and left nisri".tItwasdecidedthaiffineed to be revieNick Cox (Sun.ou,-{or!Judge Kyle,,Stan Appelbaum (LAC); Lorrie Moore(GAL),and Lori TomaselriBetsy card (Juvenite clerk), l.ii.o virale and cary cliff (attorneys),Fran and Judy (GFCRB)andto discuss continuing urru, oi"oncemCFCRBidentifiedin drp.nd.n.yby(fortr..are system) issues.This group continues to meet t"dependency court. Fran reported that arthough r.rotution orproblemagreedareasupon,arewe find tha11!ey are rarery implement"a- rn...disconnectis a majorbetween legal (DiF) and Family preservatrorr. prun and Judy willthe Nov. *..iinn.Problems at Judicial *""scheduled and cancelled because reports are not completed; rapidcase managersturn overwhoinare not properly trained and lack prop"ipreparedrupr*isionfor reviews;are notlegal errors/omissions are ,;;;Jqincompleteinaccurate,social studies reports are submitted; Fl. statuies are not foilowed.It was decided that the panels would begin to list the areas of concern in arecomrnendations:,:i:ffT:ll:r^*eform.NovemberThis *'iu.in-servicediscussedfor panerat ourmembers. we w'r "n"o*urJ"u"i",*Xrl#nini. CN sent their

'een Task ForceVolunteer RecruitmentContactstrainers to observe a JR but we have had no feedback from thernstrumental in organizing a task force toold who are in relative or non-relativeependent Living program. The goal is to,e adults. Judy and Fran have acted asb)r word o{mouth. Fran will ask at G.Theret'asueenffio1liertod.ependencyissuesbythemedia.we feel that state legislative support would arso be usefur. veora knows BurtSaunders.use of media must be cautionary but a guest commentary, which cannot bealtered, might be attempted to bring some attention to areas of concern. Williewill make an attempt at getting something written.Adjourned10:30 AM

Citizen's Foster Care Review BoardRecord of Income/ExpensesJanuary 1, 2007 - December 31, 2007Opening Checkbook Balance:(1t1to7)$2,647.39Deposits:Bingo ProceedsMisc. (Encore Group)Total Deposits:$2s4.00$50.00$304.00Expenses:Accounting FeesAnnual FilingsAnnual Recognition Night (2006)CalendarsMeetingsMisc.Office Supplies/ExpensesTraining/EducationTotal Expenses$160.00$71.25$650.00$167.41$57.1 6$383.77$239.1 6$1,728.75Balance as of 12t31t07$1,222.64

I# of Gases/# of Ghildren538,/,"Itl # of CasesI # of childrenThis chartrepresents allcases/childrenheard at PanelJudicial Reviellsin 2007(3 I9 Cases/538Children)# of Judicial Reviews # of Children Involved2007 319 (3.6% Decreaset 5382006 331 (21% decrease) 5642005 419 (109% decrease) 7642004 470 (5.7% decrease) 8112003 498 915Information obtained from Children's Network of Southwest Florida reflect anf:::::.:-"1.11 :1u. ]r cases from Jluarv _ Decembe t 2007 for coflier co,rnry.However, our figures once again reflect a decrease (3.6%). w"these numbers but will continue to track the trends to be sure that "..cases "rluL"tl'll.orr.il. proceed asagreed with the first two Judicial Reviews being referred to the CFCRB and the thirdreview being conducted by the Dependency Court Judge.

14012010080604020g0 - 12 fVbnthsr 13 - 24ltlonthstr 25 - 36lrbnthsdi# of Months in Gare132 ;2tIVlonths in Care1327924U 37 - 48 Sionths 18a 49 - 60 ltbnths 5Et 61+ lr/lonths 20IE- - 12 r\,r";rhtir 13 - 24 trlbnthsr:25 - 36 lvlonthstr 37 - 48 lVbnthsa 49 - 60 filbnthstr 61+ lr/lonthsWe compared the 2007 experience with the last several years. There was a significantincrease (l l 3%) in cases open twelve months or less. ihir ir consistent with ourbelief that the number of new cases increased this year.Another trend we are seeing is that cases are being closed sooner than in the past.Since the goal is permanency, this appears to be a very positive trend. we aresomewhat concerned that it may partially be a result of case plans that are lessrigorous than in the past. We will continue to follow the numbers of cases openingand closing and will also note cases that re-open within a year of closure.

oPrimary Reason for Entry into Gare2502()()15()1()()5(,Abandonmento2(J07t8Ahre-SexulCbild ElehaviorDeeedP{entt3DomesticWrolenceI Incu@rated PtrentE Mental Health (Ptrent)INeglectI Srbstmce AhseOtherComboAs in previous years! substance abuse is the overwhelming factor in children entering thedependency system. There was a decrease in the number of children entering the system due todomestic violence. We've been told that families involved in domestic violence are being referredto altemative programs. There was a disturbing increase in the number of children entering thesystem due to physical abuse.

Goal"l+97-'-'"--'105 100113100cEP t()80E 60t+4020II1 034EfReunificationIAdoptionEContinuedgCancelledIPGDCEPPFWRIAP P LAESAMPlconcurrentGoalEtReunificationlA doption105100tfContinued39[]CancelledIPG DCE PPFW RI A PPLAESA MP9n34137lConcurrentAlthough the numbers are relatively small, the goal of APPLA (Another planned permanentLiving Arrangement) experienced the greatest percentage increase. We want to be certainthat this goal is used judiciously, where a rcalpermanency plan is in place for the child.

Age of Ghildren20,{U^15010050oAge of ChildrenI'3 - 5 ifE'6 - 10 iriEt '1 1- 151 ill'16+1iIAgell-15No notable differenceswere reflected in the asesof children in thedependency system in2007Gender;iini MaleIlIFemaleAgain. gender did not appear to be a factor forchildren entering the dependency system.iI

Attendance at Panel Judicial ReviewsE*,; - -,i lfatner A,CtFather BLloct;rol] lCaregiver l] Etrherapistllenr-ilI E GALReport'lGALAtryI] oo.*",, 1 lllI Interpr€ter I'Cl MomAllyi aOadA Ally]ro"canrtyII] itlcase ManaserI ilf CaseSupervisort: DcF Atty1 il Et Wr i il en s atement45iEli!''-' - -iMom Dad DadBChrldCareGiverl heraprslGALGALReptGALAttjGAIStaffAtt!157 104 28 20 1 ll5 44 69 58 -19 146 80 .104 l7,s ll9 4 45l4'l 86 29 5 30 l5 21 25 I -16 83 319 4',7 ll9 37222 l7l II 4o 59 l7 IJ )7 t0 99 12 t78 99 t0'7 404'71'7l6 I52b 8.3 l0 38 28 l-r I 39 2l ll6 4 I 147 463an273 t76 57 H.l ll0 2ti l-15 57 240 r68 l'1 .16C, t69 478 -11 55t0terptderMourAttvDadDadBCaseMgrCasesupDCFAttYWritStntotherAn important increase occurred in the number of case supervisors attending judicial reviews in 200i . This waswelcome and necessary because of the frequent turnover of case managers.

Goal Changed by CFCRE]24Goal chanses 2007 2006 2005CFCRB 2426t64.46Yo4.6vo2.1%Parent and Parent Attorney Attendance4003002001000390cr# oip.i;GeiigiuG to attena jn- i iI # of Parents who attended JR I itr # of Attorneys representing parents=tlltgTe)s who attended JR iParentsParentsAttorneys Attorneys Aftendedlnvolved AttendedAssisned2007 390 261249 2W67.69%200683,94%4t4 2652712276101%83200503%{ 7_'404376 2977038%20047899%614 J /f462 3516107%752003 -@- 97%671 46250668.85%79.81%Although modest, rhe.e *asiNumerous scheduling elTorsdidwereattend.made throushout out the vear ve'r reqrrlrino recrrlrino i- ih i'"ufficient The CFCRR GFCRB has cnnrinrrerr continued rn ',n.L .,,notice given to work to some wrur parties.uunr uwr: Legatano rne."r.t"""r.-."tnoticing problems.il;ttffiJ:"t:ffi,Ht

IIiIIlI# of Judicial Reviews for Gaseewitfr no Case Plans319It _# of Reviewswithout caseThe CFCRB is concerned there has been an increase in cases coming before the courtwith no approved case plans. We have no ability to move this process along, but willadvise DCF, Family Preservation and the Defense Attorneys of our observations andconcerns.# of Objections Filed3Less than 1o/ of the cases heard by the panel in 2007 resulted in objections beingfiled.

Task Force on Child ProtectionPreliminary ReportJuly-October 2007Robert A. ButterworthSecretary

TABLE OF CONTENTSIntroduction.........................................................................................................1Task Force Membership.....................................................................................1Charge for Secretary Butterworth .....................................................................2Meetings of the Task Force................................................................................4Background of this Task Force Report.............................................................4Charge 1: Review the reports of the Office of Quality Assurance and Officeof Inspector General to determine specific individual, agency, and systemdeficiencies in the case of Courtney Clark ....................................................7Charge 2: Review the reports of the Governor’s Blue Ribbon Panel onChild Protection (2002) and Operation SafeKids (2003) to determine theDepartment’s continued compliance with the recommendations of thesereports...........................................................................................................9Charge 3: Conduct public hearings as necessary to gain further input fromindividuals, including parents, children, and advocates, involved in thechild welfare and criminal justice systems in the State of Florida................11Charge 4: Review and make recommendations regarding deficiencies andissues identified in the reports regarding the case of Courtney Clarkincluding reunification, stabilization, and permanency during foster care,courtesy supervision, non-relative care, and other critical child welfareand protection issues .................................................................................12Charge 5: Identify specific concerns and make recommendations regardingany legislative actions necessary to enhance the reporting and recoveryof children determined to be missing ..........................................................13

Charge 6: Identify specific concerns and make recommendations regardingany policy, procedure, administrative, or contractual actions needed to betaken by the Department of Children and Families and by Community-Based Care Lead Agency providers or their sub-contractors to betterprotect our children and to enhance the reporting and recovery of childrendetermined to be missing..............................................................................15Charge 7: Identify specific concerns and make recommendations regardingany education or training efforts which should be undertaken to enhancethe ability of agencies within the State’s child welfare and criminal justicesystems to protect Florida’s children..........................................................17Charge 8: Make any other substantive recommendations which willenhance the State’s child welfare and protection system .........................18Additional Task Force Activity.........................................................................21Future Activities of the Task Force on Child Protection ...............................21Appendix A: Task Force Appointment LetterAppendix B: Agenda, minutes, and speakers at each meetingAppendix C: Reports relating to the case of Courtney ClarkAppendix D: Compliance reports relating to the Governor’s Blue Ribbon Panel on ChildProtection and Operation SafeKids

PRELIMINARY REPORT OF THETASK FORCE ON CHILD PROTECTIONIntroductionAs a result of issues which specifically arose in a parental abduction caseinvolving a child named Courtney Clark, but which were also reflected in otherhistorical and more recent cases, Secretary Robert A. Butterworth establishedthe Task Force on Child Protection to examine the gaps currently existing inFlorida’s child protection system, including efforts at reunification, stabilizationand permanency during foster care, and supervision. Further, to correct recurringproblems evidenced by these cases and suggested by on-going feedback fromthose involved in the system, the Task Force was specifically tasked withidentifying administrative, policy, legislative, education, and training efforts whichmust be undertaken to ensure the safety of Florida’s children. Appendix Aincludes a copy of Secretary Butterworth’s appointment letter to State AttorneyBarry Krischer, Chair of the Task Force.Task Force MembershipThe Task Force appointed by Secretary Butterworth included a number ofindividuals involved in the state’s criminal justice and child welfare systems:• State Attorney Barry Krischer, Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Chairman• Circuit Court Judge David M. Gooding, Fourth Judicial Circuit, ViceChairman• Major Connie Shingledecker, Manatee County Sheriff’s Office• Director Donna Uzzell, Florida Department of Law Enforcement1

• Glen Casel, Executive Director, Community-Based Care ofSeminole, Inc.• Tana Ebbole, Children Services Council, Palm Beach County• Adam M. Goldstein, Board of Trustees, Our Kids of Miami-Dade/Monroe, Inc.• Jim Kallinger, Chief Child Advocate, Office of the Governor• Richard Komando, Program Director, Guardian Ad Litem, FourthJudicial Circuit• Devan Coffman, Youth Advisory Board President, District 1• Rochelle Hooke, Florida Youth Shine Representative• Patricia Badland, Director, DCF Office of Family Safety• Circuit Administrator Alan Abramowitz, 15 th Judicial Circuit,Department of Children and FamiliesStaff support for the Task Force was provided by personnel from theOffice of the Secretary, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Operations, andOffice of the Assistant Secretary for Programs within the Department of Childrenand Families.Charge from Secretary ButterworthSecretary Butterworth specifically charged the Task Force with:• Reviewing the reports of the Office of Quality Assurance and Officeof Inspector General to determine specific individual, agency, andsystem deficiencies in the case of Courtney Clark;• Reviewing the reports of the Governor’s Blue Ribbon Panel onChild Protection (2002) and Operation SafeKids (2003) todetermine the Department’s continued compliance with therecommendations of these reports;2

• Conducting public hearings as necessary to gain further input fromindividuals, including parents, children, and advocates, involved inthe child welfare and criminal justice systems in Florida;• Reviewing and making recommendations regarding deficienciesand issues identified in the reports regarding the case of CourtneyClark including reunification, stabilization and permanency duringfoster care, courtesy supervision, non-relative care, and othercritical child welfare and protection issues;• Identifying specific concerns and making recommendationsregarding any legislative actions necessary to enhance thereporting and recovery of children determined to be missing;• Identifying specific concerns and making recommendationsregarding any policy, procedure, administrative, or contractualactions needed to be taken by the Department of Children andFamilies and by Community-Based Care Lead Agency providers ortheir sub-contractors to better protect our children and to enhancethe reporting and recovery of children determined to be missing;• Identifying specific concerns and making recommendationsregarding any educational or training efforts which should beundertaken to enhance the ability of agencies within the State’schild welfare and criminal justice systems to protect Florida’schildren;• Making any other substantive recommendations which will enhancethe State’s child welfare and protection system.In accomplishing this effort, the Task Force was also directed to provide apreliminary report of its activities, findings, and recommendations to SecretaryButterworth by October 1, 2007.3

Meetings of the Task ForceThe first meeting of the Task Force was held on August 3, 2007, atStetson University College of Law, Tampa Campus. Subsequent meetings wereheld on:• August 16 at Stetson University College of Law, Tampa Campus• September 5 in Orlando as part of the State Dependency Summit• September 20 in Ft. Lauderdale at Nova Southeastern University• October 10 in Jacksonville in the Jacksonville City CouncilChambersThe agenda and minutes for each of these meetings are provided asAppendix B of this Preliminary Task Force Report.Background to this Task Force ReportThroughout its meetings, a number of issues surfaced and guided bothTask Force discussions and recommendations. First, in the case which resultedin the creation of this body, we each have been struck by the human errors andfailures in information sharing and exchange that prevented our child welfaresystem from effectively protecting this child. Such errors are inexcusable,particularly the over-reliance on electronic rather than personal contact betweenchild protection staff from several agencies. We concur with SecretaryButterworth that it is the Department of Children and Families, not any outsideagency, who must take the lead in assuring that corrective measures are in placeand that those measures function now and in the future. Yet each agency,organization, and individual involved in this State’s child protection system playsa critical role in its day-to-day success and in our response to Florida’s children.Individuals throughout the system, both in public and private agencies, mustunderstand their responsibilities and be held accountable for their actions. We4

must ensure that all necessary elements are in place to protect Florida’s mostvulnerable children; we must each recognize that, when individuals fail, oursystem of child protection must not.Second, by the nature of our work, no element of the child protectionsystem—the Department of Children and Families, our Community-Based Careagencies, other providers, advocates, or law enforcement—can afford to adoptan insensitive bureaucratic response to the needs of Florida’s vulnerablechildren. Our statutes, administrative codes, policies, and operating procedurescannot be so complex and burdensome that they prevent the effective, sensitive,and timely response of the system to the needs of our vulnerable children. Ouractions must reflect the sense of urgency that such issues demand, and allelements of the system, at every level of service, must recognize that they areheld accountable for our successes as well as our failures.Third, we recognize that leadership cannot be designed simply throughregulations, policies, and procedures. It is the culture of the Department ofChildren and Families and its partner agencies that is of critical importance andwhich must support a comprehensive and action-oriented approach to the needsof Florida’s children. This culture must be established by the leadership of eachorganization and must be manifested throughout each of the involved agenciesat every point of leadership and with every involved member of staff. A culturethat accepts and encourages only high expectations, high performance, highaccountability, and maximum transparency is fundamental to the success of notonly our individual organizations, but, through them, to Florida’s entire ChildProtection System.Fourth, this State must operate and promulgate a data driven system ofcare which integrates information and best practices from the myriad affectedagencies and organizations. That system must support knowing what the most5

current research indicates and what best practices are applicable, what datawithin our own system indicate, and how we can best effect continuousimprovement of the individuals served by the system, as well as of the systemitself. We must define and drive our measurements in such a manner that we—and those we serve—understand what constitutes success.Fifth, we live in a state in which crisis is the norm and band-aid solutionsto complex problems a common approach. In protecting the lives and health ofour children, Florida can no longer react to individual incidents, nor ineffectivelyand incompletely implement necessary changes and improvements to oursystem. Instead, we must institutionalize and assure a comprehensive, effective,consistent system of protection and care that is adequately funded, staffed, andprofessionally competent to deal with the changing and complex needs of ourchildren and society.Finally, as we have heard repeatedly in testimony and in our owndiscussion, success in our child protection system must rest on the core principlethat all agencies and individuals involved in prevention, protection, and treatmentservices for Florida’s children must effectively communicate and collaborate. Thesafety of our children is too important to allow petty grievances, personalagendas, and turf wars to interfere.6

CHARGE 1: Review the reports of the Office of Quality Assuranceand Office of Inspector General to determine specific individual,agency, and system deficiencies in the case of Courtney Clark.The Task Force received and reviewed these reports and heardpresentations from appropriate Departmental staff in its early deliberations.Copies of these reports, a timeline of key events, and a monitoring instrument foractions already taken by the Department are included in Appendix C.Findings:It is clear that, in the case of Courtney Clark, a number of critical elementsof the system and individuals charged with her protection did not perform up tostandard. The Department and the Community-Based Care Agency failed toadequately provide for the care, safety, and protection of this child and onlythrough exceptional efforts by personnel within law enforcement assigned to themissing child case was further tragedy avoided. As noted in the reports, failuresthroughout the system could be attributed to:- poorly established protocols within contract provisions- lack of proper contract oversight by the Department- weak internal controls by the Community-Based Care Agency- poor documentation- ineffective communication by all parties- ineffective quality assurance reviews by the department and theCommunity-Based Care Agency- the lack of a sense of urgency on the part of many individualsinvolved in the caseRecommendations:• The Department has already developed a series of required actionsas a result of this case which are included in Appendix C. The Task7

Force endorses these actions, particularly the effort to reduce thereview time period for children not seen by a caseworker to 31days. However, we recognize that, to be effective, theimplementation of these steps requires a sense of urgency on thepart of both the Department and the Community-Based Careagencies. Further, the corrective actions must be monitored,compliance assured, and personnel at all levels held accountablefor their actions.• The Task Force recommends that the Department, utilizinginformation compiled from law enforcement and Community-BasedCare Lead Agencies provide a report on the status of thesecorrective actions at each of its upcoming meetings.8

CHARGE 2: Review the reports of the Governor’s Blue Ribbon Panelon Child Protection (2002) and Operation SafeKids (2003) todetermine the Department’s continued compliance with therecommendations of these reports.The Task Force reviewed these reports and heard presentations fromappropriate Departmental staff early in its deliberations. An updated compliancereport regarding the recommendations of these reports is included in AppendixD.Findings:Each of these reports provided specific recommendations to deal withdeficiencies identified in Florida’s child location system. Unfortunately, in anumber of cases, these necessary and appropriate enhancements have not beenpermanently incorporated into the Department or system response throughpolicy, procedures, or training.The Blue Ribbon Panel recommended that case files contain a currentphotograph, fingerprints, and birth verification of every dependent child, andState statute and Departmental rule now address this requirement. This Reportadditionally recommended that the Department review the feasibility of a DNAswab for every dependent child. Operation SafeKids also recommended that theDepartment collect and store DNA samples without analysis for all children underschool age. Although the Department collects DNA samples when there is aquestion of paternity, it has indicated that there are no plans to expand thispractice. This Task Force on Child Protection has noted that DNA is a morethorough and, under certain circumstances, successful technology for positivelyidentifying a person than is the use of fingerprints.9

Recommendations:• The Task Force recommends that the Department review theindividual recommendations included in the most currentcompliance reports for the Governor’s Blue Ribbon Panel andOperation SafeKids to determine their current need, viability,applicability, and alternative practices; identify those that are notcurrently being systematically implemented but remain necessary,and identify any barriers for implementation; and take action toassure complete implementation in a timely fashion, on-goingmonitoring, and accountability of assigned personnel.• The Task Force recommends that the Department provide thisTask Force with an on-going report on the status of suchimplementation, using information compiled from law enforcementand Community-Based Care Lead Agencies, at each of itsupcoming meetings.• The Task Force recommends that a workgroup including theDepartment of Children and Families, local law enforcement, theFlorida Department of Law Enforcement, the Chief Child Advocatein the Office of the Governor, and appropriate legal and children’sadvocates, be created to determine the feasibility of collecting DNAfrom children that are in the custody of the Department andrecommends to this Task Force procedures regarding DNAcollection, storage, testing, destruction, and privacy issues forconsideration in preparation for its next report.10

CHARGE 3: Conduct public hearings as necessary to gain furtherinput from individuals, including parents, children, and advocates,involved in the child welfare and criminal justice systems in Florida.The Task Force offered an opportunity for public presentations andcomments at its meetings on August 16, September 5, September 20, andOctober 10. A total of 41 individuals presented at the request of the Task Forceor offered public comments. Among those who addressed the Task Force wereformer Governor Buddy MacKay; Senator Ronda Storms, Chair of the Children,Families, and Elder Affairs Committee; Senator Nan Rich, Vice Chair of theHealth and Human Services Appropriations Committee; and Representative BillGalvano, Chair of the Healthy Families Committee. A list of all those whoappeared before the Task Force, including presenters and members of thecommunity, is included in Appendix B.11

CHARGE 4: Review and make recommendations regardingdeficiencies and issues identified in the reports regarding the case ofCourtney Clark including reunification, stabilization and permanencyduring foster care, courtesy supervision, non-relative care, and othercritical child welfare and protection issues.Findings:Current statutory language governing the background screeningrequirements for relatives, non-relatives, foster parents, and other potentialcaregivers for children who are the subjects of Chapter 39 proceedings areinconsistent and at times contradictory. As a result, adequate screening prior toplacement of a child may not occur. Additionally, judicial approval of andlicensing requirements for non-relative placement are insufficient. It is importantfor the Task Force to reaffirm that the ultimate goal of screening is to ensure thatchildren are placed with safe and nurturing caregivers and that permanency isachieved for children who are not reunified with their families, placed withrelatives, or adopted.Recommendations:• The Task Force recommends that the Department develop andpropose legislation which will strengthen and standardizebackground screening requirements for all potential caregivers forchildren who are subject to Chapter 39 proceedings, as well asothers residing in the home; enhance judicial oversight of childrenin non-relative placement; and explore the impact of licensingrequirements for non-relative caregivers.12

CHARGE 5: Identify specific concerns and make recommendationsregarding any legislative actions necessary to enhance the reportingand recovery of children determined to be missing.Findings:The Florida Senate Committee on Children, Families, and Elder Affairshas taken as an interim project a review of laws and procedures governing thereporting of missing children. The staff report is due on October 2, and this TaskForce looks forward to reviewing those recommendations.As evidenced by this case, there is a lack of statutory clarity regarding thetaking of missing children reports by law enforcement when a child is alleged tobe in the company of a biological parent who flees during an open child abuseinvestigation or open protective supervision case.Once reported, missing children are routinely entered into the FloridaCrime Information Center (FCIC) and the National Crime Information Center(NCIC). However, as this Task Force has heard, absent a specific criminalviolation, the parent or guardian who has removed them may not automaticallybe entered into either of these law enforcement information-sharing systems.Recommendations:• The Task Force recommends that the Department and appropriatelaw enforcement entities provide support to the Senate interimproject on the development of legislation requiring law enforcementto accept a missing child report when that child is in the legalcustody of the Department and is alleged to be in the custody of abiological parent who flees during an open child abuse or openprotective supervision case.• The Task Force recommends that, in conjunction with a workgroupof Community-Based care providers, law enforcement, state13

attorneys, youth, and other appropriate stakeholders, theDepartment develop appropriate administrative rules governingchild location procedures and practices, including procedures forreporting missing children in the custody of the Department orCommunity-Based care provider agencies and a standard protocolfor efforts to locate the missing child.• The Task Force recommends that the Department develop andpropose statutory language which clarifies the violation of removinga child from the state or concealing a child during dependencyproceedings or abuse or neglect investigations contrary to stateagency instruction or court order.• The Task Force recommends that, in conjunction with a workgroupof law enforcement, the Department of Children and Families, andother involved stakeholders, the Florida Department of LawEnforcement develop appropriate legislation, rule, or other neededadministrative action that would allow the linking of adult “personsof interest” and their vehicles with a missing child in the FCIC/NCICsystems.14

CHARGE 6: Identify specific concerns and make recommendationsregarding any policy, procedure, administrative, or contractualactions needed to be taken by the Department of Children andFamilies and by Community-Based Care Lead Agency providers ortheir sub-contractors to better protect our children and to enhancethe reporting and recovery of children determined to be missing.Findings:The relationship among the Department, Community-Based Careagencies, and law enforcement is particularly critical in cases involving childrenwho are reported to be missing or abused. Written agreements and protocolsbased on best practices must be worked out and exist among all agenciesinvolved in any aspect of the response to ensure clarity of roles, responsibilities,and actions when the situation occurs.Many children who are reported as missing are runaways, frequentlyrepeating this behavior. Efforts to identify and correct the causative factorsbehind this repeated behavior are inconsistent and sporadic, and a significantportion of Florida’s missing juveniles are chronic runaways.Recommendations:• The Task Force recommends that the Department, in conjunctionwith representatives from Community-Based Care agencies, theFlorida Sheriffs Association, and the Florida Police ChiefsAssociation, develop a model memorandum of understanding foruse by agencies throughout the state and governing lawenforcement and social service response during and after normalbusiness hours.• The Task Force recommends that the Department, in conjunctionwith the Community-Based Care agencies, Florida Network forYouth and Family Services, and local law enforcement, undertake a15

coordinated effort to identify and target for improvement shelterswhich reflect a high incidence of runaways; develop a protocol fordebriefing chronic runaways; and conduct interventionassessments in an effort to reduce the initial as well as the chronicincidence of runaways.16

CHARGE 7: Identify specific concerns and make recommendationsregarding any educational or training efforts which should beundertaken to enhance the ability of agencies within the State’s childwelfare and criminal justice systems to protect Florida’s children.Findings:The Courtney Clark case and other issues involving missing, abused, andexploited children have shown a need for both a closer working relationship withlaw enforcement and enhanced training for law enforcement and social servicepersonnel.Recommendations:• The Task Force recommends that the Department, in conjunctionwith the State’s Community-Based Care Lead Agencies and theFlorida Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission,undertake a review of the training available for criminal justice andsocial service personnel in order to develop a coordinated,comprehensive approach to professional education. Such jointtraining efforts should include sharing of information andcoordination of efforts between law enforcement and protectiveinvestigators.17

CHARGE 8: Make any other substantive recommendations whichwill enhance the State’s child welfare and protection system.Findings:Current statutory language requires the Department and sheriff offices tocomplete a child protective investigation within 60 days regardless of thedisposition of the case. The requirement can be problematic in three situations: inchild death cases, where it routinely takes more than 60 days to receive a finalmedical examiner’s report on the case of death; in investigations involvingmissing children in which the child is not located within the 60 day timeframe; andin reports that involve an on-going concurrent criminal investigation and in whichthe closing of the abuse case and release of information would jeopardize theother criminal case.The decision-making process to remove a child from his/her family andplace that child in foster care must balance a number of considerations: diligentefforts to prevent removal, impact of placement on safety/risk factors, andavailability of services to remediate the problem for the family. The trauma ofseparation and placement in foster care presents its own set of safety/riskfactors. Prevention of removal and intensive in-home services must bethoroughly explored by the entire child welfare system.The Task Force heard testimony from child advocates concerning the alltoo-commonpractice of moving children between different foster homes for avariety of reasons, including lack of sufficient foster home placement choices forappropriate matches for children and caretakers. Youth representatives on theTask Force echoed these concerns, relating their personal experiences with suchdisruptions that negatively impacted their school life, social life, and contact withsiblings. The Task Force was also made aware that Federal audits of placementstability indicate a downward trend on this performance measure that placesFlorida at risk for financial penalties. We recognize that improvements in the18

availability of front end services will result in additional reductions in placementsin foster care and damage associated with repeated placements.Children within the system of care frequently need additional “eyes”protecting their interests. Legal assistance, however, is not available for allchildren in need. It is our responsibility to ensure that children have theopportunity to appear in court when their cases are heard; that children are heardduring those hearings; and that children have necessary representation duringthe legal process.Existing Florida laws at times thwart the necessary exchange ofinformation between social service agencies and at times impede theeffectiveness of service delivery. Additionally, in a number of cases discussedwith the Task Force, information which should be made public or at least sharedwith involved individuals, including the child or his/her legal representative, isrestricted by statute. In other situations, foster and adoptive parents have not hadaccess to full and complete information concerning the children in their care.Recommendations:• The Task Force recommends that the Department draft andpropose language to amend Section 39.301, F.S., to allow for anextension of the investigatory timeframe in certain clearly definedcircumstances.• The Task Force recommends that the Department and Community-Based Care Lead Agencies explore the promise of the IV-E waiverimplemented in October 2006 and the opportunity to use availablefunds to prevent removal by providing intensive and effective homeservices.• The Task Force recommends that the Department and Community-Based Care Lead Agencies work with the Youth Law Center todevelop strategies for recruitment and retention of foster care and19

adoptive placements. The Task Force requests an update on theresults of current discussions between the Youth Law Center andthe Department’s executive management on this issue at itsmeeting in January 2008.• The Task Force recommends that the State assure adequatefunding and support for the Guardian Ad Litem program.• The Task Force recommends that the Department expand itsefforts to assure that a guardian ad litem or attorney is appointedfor each child within the State’s child protection system.• The Task Force recommends that the Department propose suchlegislative changes and administrative rules as are necessary toensure that a child aging out of foster care has full access to his/herfiles and records;• The Task Force recommends that the Department develop andimplement a strategy to enforce current statutes and rules thatrequire caregivers to be provided all background information,including medical and psychiatric reports, for the children in theircare.• The Task Force recommends that the Department develop andpropose legislation to update statutes regarding confidentialitypractices, privacy protection, and information sharing betweenagencies involved in child protection and welfare, especially inregard to:o Child welfare and child protection recordso Educational recordso Medical and behavioral health recordso Juvenile justice recordso Specialized services20

Additional Task Force ActivityIn defining its mission and organizing its work, the Task Force hasestablished six workgroups to conduct independent review of current childprotection processes and laws/rules, identify deficiencies, and developrecommendations and proposed action plans for further consideration by theTask Force in the following areas:• Home study form/process and implementation• Out of county services• Child protective investigation to services transition• Systems of care• Stabilization and permanency• Child recovery and Operation SafeKids follow-upFuture Activities of the Task Force on Child ProtectionWith the hearings conducted thus far and with the submission of thisPreliminary Report, it is clear to the Task Force that our work has just begun andthat, to fully review and recommend long-term improvements to Florida’s ChildProtection System, we must continue to commit appropriate time, effort, andenergy. In addition to the suggestions for on-going activities included throughoutthis Report, we anticipate future discussions and recommendations concerning:• The structure, measures and guiding principles of our Community-Based Care Lead Agencies;• Clarification of the roles, responsibilities, and interactions of theDepartment, the Community Alliances, and the CBCs;• The development of an accountability system, including clearlydefined outcome performance measures and qualityassurance/quality improvement processes, that guides the entire21

Child Protection System from the Department through thesubcontracted agencies;• A standardized and consistent methodology for payment to theCommunity-Based Care Lead Agencies;• Certification of Community-Based Care Lead Agencies;• Turnover rates of personnel within the child welfare system andstrategies for enhanced personnel retention;• The establishment of an on-going estimating conference toregularly analyze system demand and cost of care;• The complexity of the statutes, administrative rules, and operatingprocedures governing child protection within the State of Florida;• Mediation and its role in the initial development of a case plan;• Child on child sexual abuse;• Identification of minimum standards of care, model programs, andbest practices for our child welfare and protection system;• Strategies to successfully implement and institutionalize necessarychanges throughout the child welfare and protection system.This Task Force has focused its preliminary efforts primarily on issuesrelated to missing children and on specific points which can be readily addressedin the upcoming session of the Legislature. However, in order to makecomprehensive recommendations concerning the overall child welfare system, topursue the critical issues which must be examined, and to avoid distraction byother concerns, we anticipate that the full Task Force will meet on a bi-monthlybasis through September 2008. We believe that this will allow us to effectivelyuse our committee structure to more fully explore the issues which we haveidentified and, at the same time, provide for on-going monitoring of the efforts ofthe Department, our Community-Based Care Lead Agencies, our social serviceand criminal justice partners, and the Florida Legislature to address thesepreliminary recommendations.22

State of FloridaDepartment of Ghildren and FamiliesCharlie GristGovernorRobert A. ButterworthSecretaryJuly 17,2007Mr. Barry Krischer, State AttorneyFifteenth Judicial Circuit401 North Dixie HighwayWest Palm Beach, FL 33401Dear Mr. Krischer:As I have reviewed the issues we have seen in the case involving Courtney Clark, I havebeen struck by the human errors and failures in information sharing and exchange thatprevented oui child welfare system from effectively protecting this child. lt is my positionihat such errors are inexcusable and that this Department, not any outside agency, musttake the lead in assuring that corrective measures are in place, and that those measuresfunction now and in the future. Individuals throughout the system must understand theirresponsibilities and be held accountable for their actions. We must ensure that allelements are in place to protect Florida's most vulnerable children; when individuals fail,our system of child protection cannot.While the case of Courtney Clark has broughthese issues to a head, it is clear from otherhistorical and more recent cases that we must fix, once and for all, the recurring problemsin our child protection system. To this end, I have established a Task Force on Childprotection to examine tne gaps currently existing in our system, including in our efforts atreunification, stabilization JnO permanency during foster care, and supervision, and toidentify administrative, policy, legislative, education, and training efforts which must beundertaken to ensure the safety of FtoriOa's children. I have asked a number of prominentindividuals involved in our criminaljustice and child welfare systems to join you in servingon this group:. Circuit Court Judge David M. Gooding, Fourth Judicial Circuit^. Major Connie Shingledecker, Manatee County Sheriffs Offic{o Director Donna Uzzell, Florida Department of Law Enforcement. Gten Casel, Executive Director, Community Based Care of Seminole, Inc.o Tana Ebbole, children services council, Palm Beach county1317 Winewood Boulevard, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0700Mission: protecthe Vulnerable, Promote Strong and Economically Self-Sufficient Families, andAdvance Personal and Family Recovery and Resiliency

Mr. Barry KrischerPage TwoJuly 17,2007o Adam M. Goldstein, Board of Trustees, Our Kids of Miami-Dade/Monroe,Inc.o Jim Kallinger, Chief Child Advocate, Office of the Governoro Richard Komando, Program Director, Guardian Ad Litem, Fourth JudicialCircuit. Devan Coffman, Youth Advisory Board President, District 1o Rochelle Hooke, Florida Youth Shine Representativeo Director Patricia Badland, Department of Children and Families FamilyService Programo Circuit Administrator Alan AbramowiZ, 15th Judicial Circuit, Department ofChildren and FamiliesI am specifically charging this Task Force with:o Reviewing the reports of the Office of Quality Assurance and Office ofInspector Generalto determine specific individual, agency, and systemdeficiencies in the case of Courtney Clark;Reviewing the reports of the Governor's Blue Ribbon Panel on ChildProtection (2002) and Operation SafeKids (2003) to determine theDepartment's continued compliance with the recommendations of thesereports;Conducting public hearings as necessary to gain further input fromindividuals, including parents, children, and advocates, involved in the childwelfare and criminaljustice systems in this State;Reviewing and making recommendations regarding deficiencies and issuesidentified in the reports regarding the case of Courtney Clark includingreunification, stabilization and permanency during foster care, courtesysupervision, non-relative care, and other criticalchild welfare and protectionissues;ldentifying specifi concerns and making recommendations regarding anylegislative actions necessary to enhance the reporting and recovery ofchildren determined to be missing;ldentifying specifi concerns and making recommendations regarding anypolicy, procedure, administrative, or contractual actions needed to be takenby the Department of Children and Families and by Community Based CareLead Agency providers or their sub-contractors to better protect our childrenand to enhance the reporting and recovery of children determined to bemissing;

Mr. Barry KrischerPage ThreeJuly 17 ,2007o ldentifying specifi concerns and making recommendations regarding anyeducational or training efforts which should be undertaken to enhance theability of agencies within the State's child welfare and criminaljusticesystems to protect Florida's children;o Making any other substantive recommendations which will enhance theState's child welfare and protection system.t appreciate your willingness to serve as Chairman of this vital Task Force. I would askthat you conduct your first meeting no later than August4,2007, and provide a preliminaryreporto me by October 1,2007. Assistant Secretary George Sheldon will assure that youand your Task Force are provided staff assistance necessary to perform your tasks in atimely fashion, and the Department's Executive Leadership will provide support asrequested.Thank you for your on-going service to the citizens of the State of Florida.Robert A. ButterworthSecretary

Task Force on Child ProtectionPresenters and Public TestimonyJuly-October 2007Jim Adams, CEO, Family Support ServicesStan Appelbaum, Local Advisory CouncilLaurie Blades, DCF Senior Management Analyst SupervisorDave Bundy, Children’s Home Society President and CEOKathleen Bushong, Former Foster ParentMary Cagle, Director, DCF Children’s Legal ServicesChris Card, Providence CooperationJohn Cooper, DCF Regional Director, Northeast RegionCharlie Cox, Florida Baptist Children’s Home, Inc.Nick Cox, DCF Regional Director, Suncoast RegionDarby Dickerson, Dean, Stetson University College of LawPete Digre, Child Welfare Consultant with the Youth Law CenterNancy Dreicer, DCF Regional Director, Northeast RegionGay Frizzell, Chief of Services & TrainingBill Frye, Florida Sheriff’s Youth Ranches, Inc.The Honorable Bill Galvano, House of RepresentativesTiffany Jackson, ParentGordon Johnson, President and CEO, Neighbor to Family, Inc.Colonel Loving, Former Foster ParentSusan Loving, Former Foster ParentGovernor Buddy MacKayAndrea Moore, Executive Director, Florida Children FirstMindy Murphy, Board of DirectorsSteven Murphy, Partnership for Strong Families CEOWilliam Navas, Assistant Attorney General, DCF Children’s Legal ServicesMelissa Page-Bailie, President, Florida Foster Adoptive Parent Association, Inc.Jossefina Perez, Mother & Grandmother of children involved in the systemJeff Rainey, Hillsborough Kids CEOAppendix B

The Honorable Nan Rich, SenatorSteve Rios, Educate TomorrowWilliam Robinson, Youth Advocate ProgramNadereh Salim, Children’s Network of Southwest FloridaDr. Dorothy Schwab, Ph.D.Amy Simpson, Girls and Boys Town, Inc.Hans Soder, DCF Child Location SpecialistThe Honorable Ronda Storms, Chair, Senate CFE CommitteeJim Stringfellow, Board of DirectorsRoland Thomas, ParentRick Wallace, Family Services RepresentativeDelores Wilson, Former Foster ParentRon Zychowski, Community Partnership for ChildrenAppendix B

Task Force on Child ProtectionFinal Meeting SummaryStetson University College of Law, Tampa CampusAugust 3, 2007Call to Order and Welcoming Remarks - State Attorney Barry Krischer, Chair• Request for Circuit Court Judge David Gooding as Vice Chair, which was accepted• Acknowledged the importance of the topic and commitment of the group• The first priority will be to address the Secretary’s concerns and then consider other issues• Agree to meet every three weeks in order to produce meaningful resultsWelcome to Stetson University College of Law - Dean Darby Dickerson• The work of this committee is extremely significant, children are our future• Offered the expertise of the staff at Stetson as well as the facilities for this purposeCharge to the Task Force - Secretary Robert A. Butterworth: Summary‣ **Secretary Butterworth’s Address to the Task Force is available as a handoutSummary of Address• Thanked the Task Force for their eagerness to take on this important task. This work willdefine the future of Florida’s Child Welfare System.• When we are called to act, will we make the right decision or wrong decision?• When we are removing children, we don’t want to just trade one bad place for another.• Will the programs now in place, and our policies and procedures keep the children safe?• Our system is not broken, in serious need for repair. We must act now!• You are the leaders in this area, everyone here is a visionary, you see the future.• Good work was conducted by previous task forces that have realigned to deliver servicesin a more effective, efficient way.• Today, it is your charge to research and review every aspect of the system of care with thehope of producing results for the future of the children.• The Courtney Clark case reminds us that we need change. This case exposed problemswith the reporting of missing children, home studies, placement, supervision, and trainingto protective investigators and case managers.• We must enhance investigative processes• A need to improve oversight by the Department of Children and Families of communitybased care lead agencies. Just because we contract out these services, doesn’t mean wecontract out our responsibility. We all must be accountable.• We know that the Department, Sarasota YMCA and others share the responsibility of theCourtney Clark case. Poor communication and weak procedures contributed to the failure.Review the P&P and performance of Sarasota Y. The YMCA South is highest paid perchild, but among the lowest in performance. Y is reviewing their own policies andprocedures.• Announcement of a review team to look at the YMCA’s operations and procedures in orderto bring the CBC in compliance with performance.‣ **Press Release regarding Review Team available as handout• We’d like to have better oversight of community based case agencies. Community basedcase agency Board members and subcontract Boards are concerned, want the oversightsince they do not have the time.1

• Re-write the community based care laws to allow us to intervene when the lives of childrendemand it.• The Department of Children and Families Inspector General identified failure to followpolicies and procedures.• Encouraged review of the Inspector General’s report, as well as the Department ofChildren and Families Quality Assurance Review of the Clark case.• This case brought us here, but it is not the only issue. Go below the surface of this caseand make comprehensive and creative recommendations on our entire system of childprotection, especially reunification, use of non-relative placements, stabilization andpermanency during foster care, and communication and interaction between public andprivate agencies.• Review reports from the Governor’s Blue Ribbon Panel on Child Protection in 2002 andOperation SafeKids in 2003, and other reports that our staff will furnish. Does theDepartment comply with recommendations made by those groups? Are we following theroad map they provided?• We want to be the gold standard for the nation for child protection. We are committed tothe community-based model for child welfare, as is Governor Crist. Government alonecannot fix all the problems of our society, we need the support of community agencies, ournon-profits, faith based organizations, and our business community to help us fill in thefunding gaps and provide services and programs that the taxpayers can’t afford tosubsidize. Governor Crist has stated that we must bring the children to the table, becausevery soon it will be their table. Children issues are a top priority in his office. We needcommunity solutions to community problems.• Decisions need not be made in Tallahassee, unless they need to be made in Tallahassee.It is better to have decision making at Regional Director level. Substance Abuse andMental Health, Homelessness, Legal have been in Tallahassee rather than local…that ischanging.• We are like firefighters, we rush in when all others are rushing out. Like an ER nurse, weare assessing the injuries. However social service agencies do not receive the samerespect.• The term of this committee is not set, you may stay in existence as long as you like. Wemay need an ongoing committee to keep watch of the different issues. Although this is notan easy task and the team is very busy, you were all willing to accept this task. You havealready made a difference. As you review, you will note communities with best practices,we need this success statewide.• Vowed to lead the transformation from a troubled agency to an action agency. TheGovernor does not want any child not to be safe. Your findings will allow us to fix thesystem once and for all. For the sake of the children, we cannot fail.• Thank you for your willingness to give of yourselves to protect the children.Introductions by Task Force members• The group introduced themselves, described their experience and then explained what theybrought to this group, which included; experience in the field, practical solutions, advocate foraccess of information between child protection and law enforcement, currently in foster care,recognition that the most important work to raise children to be safe, acknowledging thatchildren are 30% of the population and 100% of our future, legislative experience, a freshlook, and working together with law enforcement.2

Discussion of Administrative Issues-Assistant Secretary George Sheldon• A lot of thought went into the panel individuals.• Learned a lot from discussion with the youth, therefore two individuals on panel torepresent that perspective• Two additional members not present-Glen Casel and Adam Goldstein• If policies and procedures and protocols from previous panels had been followed, the Clarkcase would not have happened.• Panel should look at the policies and procedures, but also a method to ensure that theyare followed• Introduction of staff available to assist (Laurie Blades, Hans Soder, Anthony Glover)• Although budget is limited, team members will be reimbursed for travel expenses• Discussion of public nature of the meetings. Committee members should send e-mailcorrespondence through George Sheldon to be distributed as public record. The web linkwill be updated daily.Overview of the Florida Child Welfare System - Assistant Attorney General Bill Navas (BureauChief in Tampa and Manatee counties).Summary of PowerPoint PresentationOpening Comments:‣ The child protection process has evolved significantly.‣ Look deeply into the child protection process-review the basics and the entire process: theproblem may be with the process itselfOverview of child welfare process• Call is reported to abuse hotline (1-800-96-ABUSE)• Mandatory reporters include doctors, nurses, teachers, and law enforcement• The reporter will remain anonymous• Initial response to a call from the Hotline• Protective Investigator receives case assignment• Includes criminal records and abuse history checks• Protective Investigator will:• Complete Child Safety Assessment (Office of Attorney General) has accessto read only)• Provide mandated referrals to Child Protection Team• Conduct collateral contacts (teachers, neighbors, relatives)• As a result of investigation, the Protective Investigator has the following options:• No further action required, referrals for community services• Offer of voluntary protective supervision• Judicial intervention and/or removal. The Office of the Attorney Generalreviews case for probable cause for removal…health and safety of the childis at risk and services in the home will not ameliorate the risk• If the child is removed the investigator will consult with the child welfare legal services toprepare a shelter petition.• A shelter hearing must be held within 24 hours (occur 24/7/365), at which time thejudge will:• Grant or not grant temporary custody to the Department• Appoint an attorney to represent the parent• Appoint a Guardian Ad Litem to represent the child• Judge will also approve the placement of the child…may be to the Department3

• Options for placement of a child:• An approved adult relative• A licensed shelter/foster home• An approved non-relativeShould be the least disruptive as possible…same school, familiar, etc.• Prior to approving relative or non-relative placement, a homestudy is required to evaluateeach caregiver’s capacity to provide a safe, stable and supportive home environment for thechild, and background checks are required (including fingerprints, local law enforcement,Florida Department of Law Enforcement, National Crime Information Center, Department ofJuvenile Justice, and abuse reports).• Placement Supervision Requirements. The caseworker must visit with the child and thecaregiver in the home:• Prior to disposition, every 7 days,• After disposition, every 30 days.• Frequency of caseworker visits can be increased if the situation warrants.• If parents do not appear for the arraignment, child will be deemed dependent.• Early Services Intervention staffing• If parent admits or consents to the allegations in the Dependency Petition, the child isadjudicated dependent. If the parent denies the allegation the case is set for trial, and aDisposition Hearing is held.• Case Plan tasks must be aligned with the allegations of the Petition.• Court listens to the Disposition and Case Plan to determine the best placement of the child.• Before a child can not be placed out of state without complying with Interstate Compact forPlacement of Children.• Court can terminate supervision and jurisdiction of the case at this time, but this is rare.• Judicial Reviews:• Held to review the child’s status and the parent’s progress towards the goal, objectivesand tasks of the case plan.• Held at least every six months until the court terminates supervision, or• Held every 90 days if the child is in residential treatment.• The foster child has the opportunity to address the court at every Judicial Review.• Permanency Review Hearing.• Is held no later than 12 months after the date the child was sheltered.• At this hearing, the court makes a determination of the child’s permanency goal, in order ofpriority.• If the parent’s are not in substantial compliance with case plan tasks, the court canrecommend Termination of Parental Rights.• Permanency Goals. In order of priority are:• Reunification. Every family has dysfunction. Is the dysfunction safe for the child?• Adoption. If reunification is not possible, then adoption is the next best option.• Permanent Guardianship• Child must live in the home for six months• Supervision is not needed• Custodial agrees that the child will not be returned to the parent without courtapproval• Court always retains jurisdiction.• Each step has rules, regulations, federal regulations, standard operating procedures to guidethe process.4

• The best interest of the child is of paramount concern.• All of this work takes a myriad of people. For many this is a vocation, given their lives for thismission…to protect children.• We welcome this change, need this change, and the children need this change.Panel Comments:• Recommendation for permanency for the staff performing the service…we need to look at thesalaries, many are over worked and under paid.• Guardians Ad Litem are not available for every child.• Is Permanent Guardianship appropriate for young children when adoption could beconsidered?• Recommendation for Permanency Review at six months has been successful for move toreunification faster and safer.• Mandatory reporter does not include family member, therefore same issues as with domesticviolence.• Question regarding teachers as mandatory reporters…public vs. private school, appropriateform to report.Remarks - Senator Ronda Storms• Her hope is that the team’s intent is to use their skills and their experience to impact thesystem to help children.• She is troubled by children being abused by parents, but even more troubled by those that areabused by the system. Give them a future and hope.• Encouraged team to look outside of the box.• Consider business solutions….why haven’t we done secret shoppers?• Exploit the strengths of the Guardian Ad Litem program. The Guardians Ad Litem aredifferent than the people that get paid to do their jobs.• Look at what other states are doing.• She stated that she will be an advocate for the team and wants them to do well. This will bemore than a report; this is an opportunity for a change, to make a difference. Encouraged theteam to make recommendations that can be done and that is something real, somethingmeaningful.Overview of Florida’s Approach to Locating Missing Children-Laurie Blades/Hans SoderSummary of Power Point PresentationThe current system for reporting, tracking, and locating missing children in general worksDebrief teen runaways upon return to determine what occurred…• Recommendation for law enforcement to be involved in order to prosecute individuals that areexploiting children (prostituting/drugs/etc).• Determine why kids are running away. Why would they rather do drugs or be in a bad environmentthan be in their foster home?• Returning a child to the same foster home after running without doing anything differently, expect torun again.• Running is not the problem…what is causing the running?• Run because of the trauma of being removed and put into a placement, then upon return put intoan environment that is too structured, then to a group home. It’s a vicious cycle.5

• Some run to get out of the “system” and keep people out of their business. In foster care, completestrangers are telling you how to live your life.• Habitual runners are sometimes punished for running rather than be counseled or talked to, whichmade him want to run more, hate the system more.• Recommendation from Operation SafeKids to debrief…why isn’t this happening?Better assessments…• Look at assessment centers to promote better placement decisions.• Once a child has run, chances increase that he will run again. Making good assessments up frontis key to prevent it in the first place.• Are the numbers prohibitive to ask the child to come before the Judge again to look at the initialplacement?• Assessment is critical, but so is to follow up.• Other resources include the Comprehensive Behavioral Health Assessment (CBHA) that isrequired for kids coming into foster care. It is a comprehensive assessment of needs.• Great in theory, but CBHA are not being done consistently. For habitual runners, they are notscheduled for a CBHA because don’t know how long before the child will run again.Representation of the child…• Transportation is an issue for getting kids in the court. The more you engage children in their caseplan, running reduces.• Difference between children represented by GAL and legal representation.• TALK TO THE CHILD!! Need to spend time at the front end. How effective are we in makingassessment? Engaging the child? Engaging the parent? Great plan, but need to follow through.• Recommendation for GAL to be able to spend time with the child, take them places away from theplacement.Behavior Analysts…• Community based care agencies determine who the Behavioral Analysts (BA) will work with, basedon the priorities they have with the children they serve and are not required to use BehaviorAnalysts to address runaway issues.• Just like the Child Protection Team, couldn’t we require a B.A. in cases that meet specific criteria?• Cannot allow privacy/confidential laws to be obstacle for B.A. reports to be done and available.Laurie Blades will clarify if there are confidentiality issues related to the Department, FDLE andlocal law enforcement receiving debriefings completed by the Behavior Analysts to assist in theefforts to locate the child.Other ideas…• Need to re-evaluate relative caregiver options. The obstacles that prevented these from happeningat removal may not still exist.• None of this is new. How do we move from theory of best practice to practice of best practice?• Look at the recommendations from Blue Ribbon Panel and Operation Safe ids and re-evaluatewhat was implemented and still in compliance.• CBCs are not implementing the Independent Living normalcy rule.• We have a lot of checkers and not a lot of doers.• Are we charged to ensure CBC works or Child Welfare works? Butterworth stated that we nevercontract out our accountability, responsibility.• Every child has the right to live a normal life….hang out with friends, go to prom, etc. not ridearound in a 12 passenger van that has the name of the residential provider on it.• Before the next meeting, a current status of Operation SafeKids and the Blue Ribbon Panelrecommendations will be provided to the team.Process that is required to report a child is missing• Identify the child is missing6

• Report to law enforcement---tool is the Missing Child Report• Document the event in Missing Child Tracking System---must also have acorresponding Missing Child Report• Need to link an adult with a vehicle to that child• Getting the adult in system is difficult without a warrant. One option is to reportadults as missing. Can Judge order? Maybe not a missing person, maybe an alert.Create something else that creates an alert. The key is the vehicle. Statute is veryvague on when a parent leaves. Need an alert to do safety checks. A pick up orderdoes not have the authority to allow law enforcement to work the case, need themissing child report.• Locate the child. Local law enforcement takes the lead with assistance and supportfrom the caseworker.• Recover-also tracked in Missing Child Tracking System• Stabilize• Prevent (prevention of the 1 st episode is critical)Recommendation:System that law enforcement can access for children similar to the injunction system that will alertlaw enforcement that the child has been removed and current status. In Palm Beach County,they have created a database that includes three years of Protective Investigation calls withsignificant information. Law enforcement is not using the information. Train law enforcement topartner with the protective investigators.Brainstorming Session‣ Facilitator: George Sheldon‣ Participants: Pat Badland, Connie Shingledecker, Rochelle Hooke, Jim Kallinger, DavidGooding,Gaps and Issues Identified and Discussed:1. Prevention• Avoid removals by providing services where parent can receive services and maintainchild with them (ex: Healthy Families-in home parenting, drug treatment facility). Theseprograms allow service provider to watch the interaction between parent/child• Would like to hear about programs that provide services with the children• Access to services before Department intervention2. Relative/Non-relative placements• Criteria for parent decision on where children will be placed at removal• The ability of parent to make decision of where children are placed is more likely whenchildren are being removed because parent is being incarcerated rather than due toabuse.• Best decision needs to be based on age. A 16-year-old can have input in decision morethan a 2-year-old.• If removed, first priority is to place with relative caregiver and/or recommendation ofparent. Need to educate caregiver on the rules and responsibilities when placing child withthem.• Task Pat Badland to bring data on use of non-relative caregivers• Establish criteria that guides placement decisions• Drivers for non-relative placements: Not enough foster care placements and theseplacements are not funded3. Removal• Top reasons for removals are substance abuse, domestic violence, mental health7

4. Placement• Court makes decision on type of placement (relative, licensed home, non-relativeplacement)• Licensed placements require unannounced visits, capacity requirements, regulations tofollow.• Placement is the most critical decision at removal. Caregiver will facilitate communication,help reunification, etc.5. Assessment• Assessment should be different with different ages (toddlers vs. teenagers)• Assessments are necessary because Judge is not a Licensed Mental Health Counselor,uses this information to make decisions.• Comprehensive Behavioral Health Assessment is not required when child is placed withrelative or non-relative caregivers• Panel needs to hear debate regarding Assessment Centers• One Stop Center---Advocacy Center may be a better approach. Child friendly, accesschild at one location (Child Protection Team, etc.)6. In-Home Service Provision• Access and timeliness (prevention and post placement)7. Evaluation of caseworker quality of service• People do what you inspect, not what you expect• Need for multiple review• Lack of documentation of services.• Quality, ongoing assessment. Caseworkers not talking with the children, focus is just tosee the child.• Develop a redundant system where if one thing fails that something else will be there.Discussion about sending different caseworkers to visit children, lack of continuity,Guardians Ad Litem, need check and balance.• Oversight by supervisors. Move from office to into the field.• Second party review.• Department exploring a tickler system for children not seen. Alert goes higher up the chainas the length of time child not seen increases8. Permanency for our children/workers/Judges (skill set and desire)9. Representation (GAL and attorney-different perspectives)• Who speaks for the child?10. Hear more from the child11. Relationship between law enforcement and DCF, joint investigations• How do we set up a training session for counties that we recognize don’t have goodworking relationships.• In addition, to investigations this also applies to runaways.• Establish criteria/guidelines for law enforcement to respond on certain kinds of reports(runaways, domestic violence).12. Recruitment of foster homes/adoptive homes• (sibling groups, limited resources prevent good matches, reach out to faith-basedorganizations)13. Homes/Adoptive relative caregivers disruptions when child turns 13.• Need post placement services, open adoptions rather than Termination of Parental Rights.Why happening, how to prevent14. Training for community based care agency Boards• Recruitment and application process8

• Job descriptions and expectations• Diversity of Board (expertise in multiple areas such as fiscal, operations, etc.)• Management report standardsAdditional Information Requested and Possible Speakers Identified:1. Operation SafeKids-current status update2. Presentations from others that have had success (Best Practices from other states)3. Use FDLE system to identify/flag (make information accessible)4. Presentation by programs that provide prevention services (example: Healthy Families – inhome parenting one-on-one instruction)5. CBC Lead Agencies perspective on service provision challenges6. Foster parents, relatives, non-relative caregivers perspective7. Human Resources from DCF and CBC to talk about retentionDiscussion:• We are always going to have child abuse, we need to focus on not abusing them within oursystem.• Use the wealth of information/data available• Also need to be concerned with families that run prior to the completion of investigations.Recognize pattern.• Multi-state issue-when parent takes children across state line.Brainstorming Session‣ Facilitator: Jim Sewell‣ Participants: Alan Abramowitz, Richard Komondo, Devan Coffman, Tana Ebbole, BarryKrischer, Donna UzzellGaps and Issues Identified and Discussed:• First need to get a good picture of the current system. Where do the reports that have beenissued fit into our current system? Look at what worked or didn’t work. What was or wasn’timplemented and why? Are obstacles real and do they still exist? Step away from specificcase and look at system• When do we shelter?• Age appropriate recommendations…cannot cookie cutter responses• Normalcy in system…what should the systems normal response be?• Look at as a business…Welfare of the children is our profit/bottom line, our investment• More than just see the kid…issue is to consider child’s welfare.• What is the theory of intervention• Increase the involvement of children in their outcomes• Front end assessment• Accountability of CBCs• Is this a system or a series of services?• Rewarding the right thingsAdditional Information Team would like:• A good example of a child welfare system• Corporate mentoring-businessNext meeting—Recommendation for Aug. 15/16/17 at same location9

Public Comments - Chairman Krischer• Accomplished more than expected today.• Next meeting, we will get a visual of current system as a starting point for findings andrecommendations.Adjournment-Chairman Krischer at 3:12 pm10

Task Force on Child ProtectionMeeting AgendaStetson University College of Law, Tampa Law CenterAugust 16, 20079:00 – 3:00Call to Order and Welcoming RemarksState Attorney Barry Krischer, ChairReview and Approval of 8/03/07 MinutesState Attorney Barry Krischer, ChairRemarksRepresentative Bill GalvanoWire DiagramOverview of the Blue Ribbon Panel‣ Recommendations and current statusDr. Dorothy Schwab, Ph.D.Gay Frizzell, Chief of Services &TrainingWire DiagramOverview of Operations SafeKids‣ Recommendations and current statusDr. Dorothy Schwab, Ph.D.Laurie Blades Senior ManagementAnalyst SupervisorHans Soder, Child Location SpecialistDiscussion‣ Schedule Future Meetings‣ Agenda for next meeting‣ Assignments for Task Force Members‣ Dependency SummitChairman KrischerPat Badland, Director, Office ofFamily SafetyPublic CommentsChairman KrischerAdjournmentChairman Krischer

Task Force on Child ProtectionMeeting SummaryStetson University College of Law, Tampa CampusAugust 16, 2007Call to Order and Welcoming Remarks - State Attorney Barry Krischer, Chair• Task Force Member Attendance: Devan Coffman, Alan Abramowitz, Glen Casel, Major ConnieShingledecker, Circuit Court Judge David Gooding, State Attorney Barry Krischer, Tana Ebbole,Rochelle Hooke, Pat Badland, Richard Kommando, Adam Goldstein• The Chair made the following comments to recap Secretary Butterworth’s address to the Task Force anddiscussions that occurred during the August 3, 2007 meeting.‣ A need to improve oversight by the DCF of community-based care lead agencies. Just because wecontract out these services, does not mean that we contract out our responsibility. We all must beaccountable. There has been a perception that because services are contracted out that thedepartment has no accountability, but Secretary Butterworth clearly indicated that this is not the case.‣ Although the C.C. case brought you here, go below the surface of this case and make comprehensiveand creative recommendations on our entire system of child protection, especially reunification, useof non-relative placements, stabilization and permanency during foster care, and communication andinteraction between agencies. This would include shortening the time in out of home care andadditional services up-front. Suggestion to take the meetings on the road to capture the best practicesfrom around the state.‣ In one of the brainstorming sessions, they indicated a need to get a good picture of the currentsystem. Palm Beach County has taken a lot of time to build a wire diagram of the process. In theprevious meeting, an overview of the process was presented verbally. Today we’d like to present avisual overview, then see how recommendations from the Blue Ribbon Panel and Operation SafeKidsfit into that diagram (what is in place/why it worked or not), with the goal of getting a good picture ofwhere we are.Review and Approval of 8/03/07 Minutes - State Attorney Barry Krischer, Chair• Motion, second, and approval of 8/03/07 meeting minutes.Remarks - Representative Bill Galvano• The issue has gone on far too long. The easy solution is funding, which is a challenge we face everyyear…. there are too many important things that need to be funded.• After observing the Hotline to understand the system, it was apparent that the significance of the task andthe environment do not match.• Community-based care is a good idea, but we need to keep our hand on it. Having community-basedcare lead agencies does not relinquish the department’s responsibility.• The hard work that is being done here is not in vain. He will listen. We can make adjustments to thelaw.• The underlying goal is to cut through the red tape and make it more streamlined. Committed to makingFlorida’s Child Welfare System the best it can be.• This is a good atmosphere for change with Governor Crist and Secretary Butterworth.1

• Looking forward to recommendations of Task ForceComments :• Across the board cuts is not acceptable. How can we communicate this to the Legislature? Cannotreduce the funds to at risk children and adults and expect them to be protected.Response: Agree with you. Ask the House and Senate not to take the cleaver approach and really look atthe needs.• Cuts to other programs like DJJ, APD, and mental health has a greater impact on the Child Welfareprogram. When they have no capacity to serve the children within those systems, they will fall into theChild Welfare system.Wire Diagram - Dr. Dorothy Schwab, Ph.D.Wire Diagram available as a handout• The Wire Diagram allows you to identify the different parties across the page to show ownership,overlap, or sequence• Each agency can be identified by a color (Hotline=Yellow, DCF=Blue, Lead Agency=Aqua,Subcontractor=Purple)• A double bar on a box indicates another entire system that is not being reviewed at this time• First Page=Report to Hotline• Second Page=Decision point where PI is assessing the safety of the child as well as the needs of thefamilyIf no safety issues, four options (no legal services):1. Close, no referrals2. Close, some referrals (voluntary-up to family to follow up)3. Referral to service (day care, SA, DV)4. Formal referral to diversion service• Page10=If child is in immediate danger• Page 11=24-hour shelter hearing• Page 12=How a hand-off can work. In this example, the Protective Investigator is more involved inservices• Other pages=Solutions that have been put in place‣ Diagramming the process for Palm Beach County, identified the following disconnects in the system(Gaps labeled on the diagram with a red circle with a line through it):• When the child is removed, the Department of Revenue money doesn’t always follow• No Memorandum of Understanding in Palm Beach County---Lead Agency needs to holdsubcontractors accountable.• Board needs to also have some responsibility• Defined protocol…to ensure that things get done• Protective Investigators making quality decisions• Lack of check/balance or communication up-front• Threats from Substance Abuse agency if non-compliance with informal referrals• Direct files tend to get dropped. If child not removed, but supervision is needed, legal may notoccur for a couple of weeks. No case management before arraignment.• Lines of communication/timeliness of communication• Time line for direct files…PI refers to services, not a clear cohesive case plan at the early part ofcrisis, missed opportunity of diversion when more likely to have an impact.• Court liaison is in courtroom to represent the case, not the case manager. Disconnect incommunication between the case manager and liaison2

• Duplication of effort between the Department/PI and Lead Agency at hand off---where it beginsand where it ends is significant• DCF legal is in the courtroom at multiple times, Lead Agency legal not in court‣ Discussion/Lessons Learned/Recommendations:• We need written protocols to guide the process. However, we need to be clear on what systemicstatewide issues are and what are unique to local areas. We do not want to burden other areas that donot have issues with broad scope recommendations. Identify key functionalities that apply toeveryone, that are valuable anywhere. Be sensitive to a framework that allows local areas to solveunique problems.• Need for an active rather than passive referral system.• In Palm Beach County, the Lead Agency is responsible for case plan. Nobody is required to do itprior to court hearing.• In some areas, despite the system, they are implementing good referrals….change structure.• These are working in smaller systems.• It is in how we set up the design and expectations.• Another option is to encourage court to do non-shelter earlier with shelter hearings.• Parking Lot: Non-shelter petition/rules committee issue—timely• Set up a Guardian Ad Litem /Court Appointed Special Advocate early in the process, as early asinvestigation (independent investigation simultaneously).• Focus on system rather than personality recommendations• Has payment been authorized for referred services? Has appointment been made?• Parents are less motivated further in the process• Be careful with unfunded mandates• Question regarding authority, would it require legislative action to make change?• Two critical functions of protective investigations: Investigation and intervention (proactive toconnect family with service needs-pass to crisis response team or lead agency)• GAL attends all shelter hearing and prioritizes representation based on severity of needs• Important to have clearly defined roles and responsibilities between investigations and service• Documentation often drives the process. System is not as user friendly as it could/should be.Untimely receipt of reports (ex: toxicology results) can impact findings of investigationsGay Frizzell - Overview of the Blue Ribbon Panel (Recommendations and current status)Powerpoint and Status Update available as handouts‣ Contact with children• Two main recommendations regarding contact with children: Monthly contact and credible trackingsystem• Policy (Florida Administrative Code) requires children to be seen every 30 days• Reports are available to track….compliance currently at 99%• New focus is on the quality of visit/contact---are these visits effective?• Good description about visit is clear indication that visit occurred• Florida is the best state in the nation at making contact with children, can be attributed to BlueRibbon Panel• Secretary has required a report of kids not seen for more than 55 days with effort to return to 32 days.At the time, approximately 50 children were on this list. Many were data entry errors, runaways, etc.• Policy change (May 2006) requiring contact every 30 days rather than monthly3

• Each Region is responsible to review list of kids not seen for more than 55 days (review three timesper week)-community-based care providers have access to this system as well.• The Secretary has directed Florida Safe Families Network developers to establish a tickler system toalert supervisor and executive leadership of agency of kids not seen for more than 33 days• Local system should already be alert of kids not seen, long before Central Office notification• In addition to the data, also focus on documentation• Why are not all parties involved notified when a child is not seen? (Guardian Ad Litem, court,etc…..may be someone has seen the child) Sharing the responsibility.• Sharing information is an excellent opportunity for a check and balance to identifyproblems….example is falsification case that was identified by Guardian Ad Litem where casemanager documented a visit when the Guardian Ad Litem knew the family had moved.• In the C.C. case, falsification was not the issue, documentation was not the issue, communicationoccurred, but the appropriate action did not occur.• New York case where foster parent had kids, but they weren’t the right kids. How do we know we’reseeing the right kids? Fingerprints and photos.• In addition to face to face visit every 30 days for safety, also need to focus on the serving the needs ofthe child/family. Focus is checking the box that the child was seen.• Data begins to be the focus rather than the mission• No where in these documents is there anything about having the Lead Agency holding the agenciesaccountable for seeing the parents?• Brevard tracks number of visits between parents and children, directly related to success ofpermanency• Anticipate changes with DCF quality assurance, consulting with Peter DiGre. Acknowledge thatDCF can do better in this area. New quality assurance plan due to Secretary Butterworth by 9/30.• Can we assume that the recommendations that were implemented in 2003 are still being done? Yes& No…Still can be improvements, checks and balances.• The emphasis on quality was not the intent of the Blue Ribbon Panel, their primary concern wassafety.‣ Assessment and Supporting Foster Parents, Relative/Non-Relative Caregivers• Screening of caregivers, study caregivers when making placements, etc.• Policies are in place, however there are gaps in practice• In the C.C. case, it was the quality of home studies• Comment on #29-fingerprinting of all adult household members for Florida Bureau of Investigationscomparison…funding not always available and of the hundreds of them that have been done in Manatee,they have not had any come back, revisit the financial burden• Comment on #27-not enough emphasis on medical….biggest challenge for community-based care LeadAgencies is that the medical information is not being relayed to the foster parents and medicalprofessionals to ensure that the children get the appropriate medical care. Why is this information in apaper file that is being passed from person to person? Need for a common information system.Everyone is segregated and nothing to integrate. Create an infrastructure/common database that allowsinterested parties (Guardians Ad Litem, foster parents) to access. Florida Safe Families Networkenhancements will include this. Senator Storms has identified the Florida Safe Families Network file asthe official record. Multiple users should be able to enter as well as inquiry. Appropriate access andsecurity. Palm Beach County has an effective system with the courts.• Comment on #47: Share information with other states regarding kids that have been in care in anotherstate. Issue for the Congress to look at.• Comment #14: Recommendation to change a local hotline to the hotline when child not seen in 30 days.4

‣ Quality Assurance• Accreditation was a recommendation from the Blue Ribbon Panel for all Lead Agencies. All aremoving toward this, but at different stages of the process.• What about the subcontractors? Blue Ribbon Panel Recommendation did not address this• Need for revision of policies to clarify, condense• Family Team Conference Model has been successful…Places that have implemented FamilyTeaming have struggled to function within the Rules, need to address the Rules, makerecommendations for changes to Rules…focus on compliance and timeframes which is difficult tobalance with Family Teaming.• In addition, recommendation for the facilitator of the Family Team Conference be a neutralparty/mediator. Leave the meeting with a family case plan that everyone has agreed to…contractcompliance with case plan and case plan tasks• Comment on #31: Performance measures for lead agencies as well as the department? Yes. Alwayslooking at the best way to measure performance that is meaningful that gets the results that we arelooking for.• Concern that this team is working on recommendations and then another team is working on makingchanges to performance measures, etc. Pat Badland will provide overview of what the Florida SafeFamilies Network is working on.• Caution what other studies/reports have offered on performance measures. Manatee County Sheriff’sOffice has found that their experience is alerting them to things that have impact…those are thethings that need to be measured.• What is the main thing that impacts service?….caseload size and retention• Caseload is significant for burnout, ability to manage work, no more than 18. Well supported thatcaseloads are too high in Florida.• Suggestion that we have a blend of performance measures and other indicative measures (caseloadsize, length of experience, salary, turnover rate—impact performance). What we should hold theLead Agency to is developing and managing an effective organization. Did community-based careaccomplish what it was intended to do….ownership within the community, additional resources andservices?• Study from Wisconsin, for every change in caseworker, five months longer to permanency• Recommendation for certification for lead agencies to establish minimum standards. Hesitant to haveanother hoop for community-based care to jump through without taking away another that is notworking.• Comments on #32-District 11 was pilot for waiver of funding restrictions, Florida is now under theIV-E waiver effective 10/1/06.• Community-based care (CBC) has moved to a Quality Assurance for their Board-good example ofCBC that has a system to review their own structure• Certification rather than an accreditation-Lead Agency as an agency effective in managing asubcontracting system• We have created a fear-driven, check box system that is not focused on a normal, healthy activitiesthat will allow children to thrive.• When we enter social work back into our system, then we will begin to make change. Createenthusiasm to do this work.‣ Representation of Children: Guardian Ad Litem• Larger cities have less represented• Not always for the life of case…may or may not be assigned during critical periods• Try to manage caseload. Staff work on 85-125 children.5

• What is the quality assurance system for Guardian Ad Litem? Volunteer retention rate,audits/accuracy rate, trends, etc.• Needs: funding, marketing for need for volunteers• Similar funding to Child Welfare Legal Services….may need to review structure to ensure noduplication, to use resources most efficiently…is this model still the most effective? Are roles clearlydefined, consistent, and working with others?• Lay persons have passion, their heart is in it to serve the child, many become foster parents, cannotpay for that experience• What are the obstacles?…mileage, parking at court house, etc.‣ Technology Enhancements (Laptops, cameras, data systems)• Success in Legislative Budget Request at that time to purchase laptops, cameras, LiveScan….whereare we now?• We expect our care managers to do quality visits, they need to be equipped to do this• How does this trickle down to the care managers? Contract language?• Do they have laptops? Not all. What are the issues? Air cards, access, speed of network, etc.• Manatee County Sheriff’s Office has built that into their budget. They have the technology, butcomplain about access or slow. Phase in technology, may take years, but need to make thatinvestment.• Who makes the decision? Is this the team recommendation/DCF, or lead agency? Best practice,kudos to those that recognize it as efficient.• How is the technology working for you? Ask if people have what they need, are they using, working,access, speed, etc. Task Force needs input on this.‣ Collaboration with education and school readiness• Usefulness of collaboration with schools, both for education and seeing children to be extra set ofeyes.• This requires 4 year olds to be registered in day care, but infants and toddlers are more at risk.• Children in foster care and under supervision are required to be in day care. May not bepracticed/enforced statewide.• Follow up implementation of the rule.‣ Staff Recruitment, Training and Retention• Loan reimbursement is not available at this time, we have the student stipend program• Contracts in place to address Supervising for Excellence, Leadership Institute, and curriculumdevelopment/training academy/Center for AdvancementRecommendations about pay and full-time positions—experience with this in Palm Beach County, turnoveris the key factor for success. We all need to be on board on how reported to ensure consistency…withcaseload, turnover, pay (Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability report from June2006 regarding turnover, pay, etc.)• Turnover really has to do with expectations at the front-end. Manatee is careful with who is hired, doride alongs, watch video of abuse from least to worst, educate applicant on what the job entails inorder to make a decision if it is the right job for them.• Has a lot to do with supervision…some supervisors have a lot of turnover, others have none, becomelike a family.• Recommendation: Definition of caseload and retention so they can be measured.• Culture Plan-recruitment/retention plan in Seminole County• Fundamental issue that has not been addressed, those with a big heart will seek this work, but theyneed to feel fulfilled in order to stay.6

• How are we moving back into social work, value-based and culture-based to support this work?• Sterling has two key elements: technology skills and culture of the organization-leadershipestablishes the culture. How are we developing the leadership? Fundamental flaw.• Energize the business community to provide more expertise to these non-profit agencies.• Culture Club in Miami – need mutual respect• As more agencies come on board, we will run ourselves out of business if our salaries do not stay inline…multiple counties vying for the same people to do the same job at various salary levels. Peopleare jumping from position to position to follow the salary increases.Overview of Operations SafeKids (Recommendations and current statusLaurie Blades, Senior Management Analyst Supervisor, and Hans Soder, Child Location SpecialistOperation Safekids Status Update and Applied Behavior Analysis Program Information Paper available ashandouts‣ Reporting & Investigating Missing Children Cases• In general, the recommendations have been implemented, but still some concerns• Critical thing: Need to establish structures and linkages between protective investigations, servicesprovided by community-based care agencies and law enforcement.• Law Enforcement is more likely to cooperate if they see value, not just dropping the case on them,working together• Five Region-Level Child Location Coordinator positions--in process of hiring• How are other states notified when child is missing? How do we notify other social service agencies?‣ Public Awareness & Outreach• Locator system-no longer useful if the other agencies don’t have it• Manatee County Sheriff’s Office-media alert when there is a concern that doesn’t meet the criteria forAmber Alert. Media is the first to criticize; this includes them in the process.• Needs to be a partnership among law enforcement, protective investigators and community base careproviders---include law enforcement/the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to do presentationat pre-service training• Joint training of protective investigators and law enforcement, most impact from includingdispatchers• Meet with Florida Sheriffs Association---encourage to foster joint training at the local level, someSheriffs are more cooperative than others‣ Prevention• Photos and fingerprints to assist Law Enforcement – improved from 28% photos to 75%• Photos applies to all children, in home and out of home, some are doing very well and some are not• Fingerprints only apply to out of home (98%)• Hard copy fingerprints is a burden---working toward the electronic to ensure timely access• Any examples of fingerprints assisting to find a child---no• Fingerprints are routinely matched to missing, crime scene, and unidentified remains…• Fingerprints or DNA is valuable when child is too young to identify who they are and the person thathas them is not willing to share who they are• The Florida Department of Law Enforcement requires dental records to be entered for those that aremissing for three months• Is there a normalcy, for what parents do for their children? Child safety kits available to have hairsamples, fingerprints, and photos on file.• Suggestion: DNA at birth with Healthy Kids7

• We require health screening with dependency. Can this be incorporated?• Duplicative systems doing the same thing---DJJ, school, etc. But, some systems are not efficient inentering the information so it is available.• There has to be a better way…a lot of energy spent getting fingerprints with little return.• We have a responsibility when we remove a child to have the ability to positively identify a child ifthey go missing.• Issues with fingerprints….accessible, reliability of prints for small children, kids involved with theDepartment of Juvenile Justice may already have them, feeling like a criminal getting prints donewhen they are removed….• What about DNA? Most reliable, may never be utilized, cost only when processed• Paranoia that DNA reveals more than fingerprints, privacy issues• Recommendation: Bring this issue to law enforcement for their input. What do they need?• Not an argument for or against fingerprints‣ Stabilization, Recovery, Legislative Action• Concern stated at previous meeting that reports from Behavior Analysts who talk to kids when theyreturn from runaway are not made available –no reason that information cannot be shared• Community-based care agencies decide how they will use Behavior Analysts…this makes sense,based on their agency’s needs. Handout includes chart of what community-based care agencies haveidentified as their priorities.• Does this team want to make a recommendation to have Behavior Analysts work with kids that arerunning to assess/evaluate what they are running from, if they have substance abuse or mental healthneeds?• If child has not been identified as having mental health needs, beneficial services may not beavailable to them• Running away is a status offense rather than a criminal offense, cannot detain them• Runaways are a real concern…if not addressed by this group, it should be by another• What is best practice for use of Behavior Analysts? Include interviews on what best practices are outthere to deal with runaways…if not Behavior Analyst, it may be another position• 65C-30, FAC requires case manager to talk with the child within 24 hours, does not have to be faceto-face• Have we looked at the data for those that use Behavior Analysts to work with runaways, have theyseen impact?• Orlando has a system in place, using tool…seen results (total # of runaways and repeat running---success is measured in length of time, frequency, and less risky behavior while away)• Team may want to get more information on how community-based care agencies see their system ofcare and continuous improvement (in Quality Assurance Plan)• Support having a conversation with runaway to determine why they ran, why they are unhappy, whatare they running from, normalcy-to have fun with friends, running to be with an older boyfriend• Look at return from runaway as serious as when they were removed---services, attention• If we only focus on the teens, we are just seeing a sliver of the system• Focus back on permanencyDiscussion-Chairman KrischerChairman asked that all team members give their perspective of the task and to identify priorities:• Steering committee of a giant project, unable to do all the work ourselves, assign expertise from aroundthe state to identify the issues, and this group to determine priorities and recommendations• Communication is key–both technology and personal. Interested in which state is doing the best, andhow they are doing it8

• Responsible for policy for the Department. Will bring update on where the Family Safety Programoffice/DCF is headed and ask for team to comment and make recommendations• Determine the five or six major issues that impact all of the others---get some action instead of sittingaround just talking about it• Looking at the previous groups, what else can we add, it’s already been said. What are the linchpins thatcould really change the system? Has the Department already identified these?• Support smaller groups that report back. Looking at the charges from the Secretary, we’ve done some,but need to get additional information from stakeholders on education, training, and recommendations.Personally-what can the courts do to make things better?• We need to maximize the potential of this group. Child Welfare has changed since the previous taskforce…more Sheriffs are now doing Protective Investigations, community-based care lead agencies aredoing services, Child Welfare has come so far, but it is still evolving. There was some great ideas fromthe first meeting (person of interest), impressed with the discussion, excited about makingrecommendations that are far reaching. Support smaller groups reporting back to this group. Continuethis process, even after this group.• Believe that Florida can be the leader in Child Welfare…we need to do that, we have to do that. Excitedto be a part of this. We forget to look back and see what we have already accomplished.• Shift the resources up front for diversion, we always spend more money dealing with it once it becomes acrisis. What are communities doing to improve quality of life?• Really concerned and focused on how we can get all of this done. Great recommendations, but it doesn’tmatter if it doesn’t change things.• Move kids through the process faster. Intent of looking at wire diagrams, see what is working and toidentify gaps. If nothing else, just streamline system.‣ Schedule Future Meetings• Dependency Summit at Ritz Carlton in Orlando• Wednesday 9/5/07 in the morning• Secretary will Chair• Good opportunity to get public comment from community-based care lead agencies, Judges, DCF,Guardians Ad Litem, etc.‣ Assignments for Task Force MembersWill use summary from these meetings and summary from the Family Safety Program Office/DCF ofcurrent projectsDependency Summit-Pat Badland Director, Office of Family Safety• Orlando, September 5-7, 2007• Three distinct forums—basic and advanced workshops, professional development session, convene byjudicial circuit• No greater opportunity to be exposed to the true child welfare work from local court communityperspective• Ask that a Task Force Member be represented in each circuit in order to get comments from all areas• Suggestion to complete a worksheet on key issues with specific information gathered…ISSUE Key Events ImprovementneededCourt DocketsChildren atHearingsWho islead?What willbe done?When?Did itwork?9

Home StudyProcessReunificationFocus onChildrenPermanencyAccess to CareTechnologyPublic Comments-Chairman KrischerDelores Wilson-Foster Parent for 10 years• Re-wrote the Foster Parent Bill of Rights…Unless we have foster parents that are respected, we arelosing the good ones and maintaining others. Working with Senator Ronda Storms on a bill. It says thatwe are all working as a team.• Not given sufficient information about foster children (foster child placed with previous history ofdomestic violence toward foster parent)• Put her family and foster family at risk• Treated unfairly due to a death caused by this foster child (her grandchildren removed and licenserevoked after being cleared by Child Protective Services)• Had to be persistent to get court information• Weed out the bad foster parents by conducting more surprise visitsAdjournment - Chairman Krischer at 3:15 pm10

Task Force on Child ProtectionMeeting AgendaJW Marriott, OrlandoRoom: Marbella 4September 5, 20079:00 – 12:009:00 – 9:30 Judge David Gooding, Vice ChairCall to Order and Welcoming Remarks• Review and Approval of 8/16/07 Minutes• Task Force Accomplishments• Introduction of Judge Dawson and Child Justice Act• Schedule future meetings9:30 – 10:00 Governor Buddy MacKayDependency Mediation10:00 – 10:30 Pat Badland, DirectorDepartment InitiativesOffice of Family Safety10:30 – 11:00 Pete Digre,Quality AssuranceCalifornia-based Youth Law Center11:00 – 12:00 Public Comments12:00 Adjournment

Task Force on Child ProtectionMeeting SummaryJW Marriot, OrlandoSeptember 5, 2007Call to Order and Welcoming Remarks• Judge David Gooding, Vice Chair of the Task Force provided opening remarks andwelcomed everyone.• Judge Gooding introduced Judge Dawson and thanked him for his work on the Children’sJustice Act and the planning of the 2007 Dependency Summit.• Judge Gooding introduced Secretary Butterworth.Secretary Butterworth’s Opening RemarksSecretary Butterworth thanked the Task Force for their work and introduced former GovernorBuddy MacKay, listing his many accomplishments: State Representative, State Senator,Congressman, two term Lieutenant Governor, Governor. Secretary Butterworth stated Floridais fortunate to have many great people serving the state and Buddy MacKay is one of thefinest.Dependency MediationGovernor Buddy MacKayGovernor MacKay introduced himself and stated he and John Cooper, Central RegionalDirector would present on a pilot project in the 5 th circuit. Governor MacKay stated heprovides an outsiders view of child welfare and the system and made the followingobservations:• Sometimes, the adult’s life is out of control, someone calls the abuse hotline, aninvestigator comes out, the child is removed, and there is a hearing where the burdenof proof is a preponderance of evidence. Thirty days after the shelter hearing, there isan arraignment when the Judge has to determine if the child is at risk, 30 more days todevelop a case plan, then judge hears both sides.• The goal is trying to get someone to change their life, attitudes and used 60 days inthe system before efforts really began.• Case plans are all alike. There are only about five options of services to choose from,for example, drug rehab, psychosocial evaluation, anger management and parenting.• Parent’s attitudes change more quickly when they are treated with respect. Inmediation, we say to them, everyone makes mistakes and we are not assuming thatyou are a bad person.How the Pilot Project Got Started• Governor Mackay stated he practiced law for 30 years, mostly corporate, property andprobate law and had no experience with dependency law.1

• The pastor of his church and his wife are foster parents and has adopted children andthey began to share their passion for these children. Governor MacKay decidedsomething needed to be done to help them.• Met with Judge Sue Robbins and discovered there was only one certified dependencymediator that was inactive. There were only 142 certified mediators in the entire state.• Governor MacKay volunteered to become a certified mediator. During the next year, 25mediators were certified. During the second year, 25 additional mediators were trainedfor a total of 50.• People with experience working with children and families were recruited, such as retiredschool teachers. Training for mediators was free and mediators provided services forfree for a certain number of hours in return prior to receiving payment per a contract.Process Used and Outcomes:• The pilot project began mediation two to three weeks after shelter. Present wereinvestigator, guardian ad litem, parents/guardian, service worker/agency and noattorneys.• Goal was to arrive at an agreement of what brought them there and what had to changeto reunite the family. Ninety-five percent of the cases were able to be mediated.• There was some selection of successful mediation participants. Those that were lesssuccessful were: 1. Families that had children previously removed in Florida. 2. Previousdependency involvement in other states.• Cases headed for termination of parental rights were excluded from the project.• The Judge was presented with an agreement that was non-binding until the lawyers had achance to review.• Since the beginning of the pilot project, people have become less adversarial, resulting inmore team work. In an adversarial environment, the interest of the child becomessecondary.• The mediation pilot reduced delay in the juvenile dependency process, saving time andreunifying families sooner.• The Dependency court process is not a criminal process; however, the way Chapter 39,F.S. is written and implemented appears to lean toward an adversarial process.• The 5 th Circuit has many more mediation cases than any other part of the state.• Eighteen months ago, there were a total of 4,300 children in care and currently there are2,800.Barrier• Need for room or space to hold mediations.Governor MacKay introduced John Cooper to present data related to the pilot project.John Cooper, Regional Director, Central RegionMr. Cooper provided a powerpoint handout to the Task Force and made the followingcomments:• Secretary Butterworth requested that the 5 th Circuit meet in Ocala to review theprogress of the dependency mediation pilot project and consider possibility to expandthe practice. A study of the pilot project was completed.• Mr. Cooper reviewed the charts contained in the powerpoint handout:2

• Page 15 entitled Circuit 5 Mediation Study: Children Receiving Services: ChildrenRemoved; 1/1/2005 – 12/31/2006.• There were two groups in the study. Lake County was the control group thatdid not participate in the pilot project and Marion County was the targetgroup that did.• Page 16 entitled Circuit 5 Mediation Study: Length of Stay in Average Days;1/1/2005 – 12/31/2006 and page 17 entitled Permanency Achieved in AverageDays 1/1/2005 – 12/31/2005.• Children who received mediation had an average length of stay of 197.5days less than children who did not receive mediation.• Children who received mediation gained permanency an average of 182.4days sooner than children who did not receive mediation.• Page 18 entitled Project Savings: 1/1/2005 – 12/31/2006:• Projected cost savings are based on assumptions:• an average of 197 day reduction;• 50% of children in licensed placements;• Savings based on minimum board payment of $429• Does not include savings in the Relative Caregiver Program,administrative savings, court savings or case management savings.• Projected total savings are approximately three million dollars.Governor Buddy MacKay: Closing Remarks and Recommendations• There are two risks children face:1. What happens to them in the home2. What happens when they move around in foster care and being separated from theirfamilies.• The University of South Florida has been contracted by the Supreme Court to assesspossible side effects of the pilot not currently being measured. John Cooper will work withthem.Recommendations:1. Continue to implement the dependency pilot project of a more formal basis.2. Keep the savings and reinvest in foster care to allow program to become self-funded.3. The state should begin an accounting procedure to show cost savings.4. DCF (possibly in conjunction with the courts) submit a legislative proposal or requestassurances from the legislature to allow both to reinvest savings and not be takenback by the legislature.5. The Department could set up a fund similar to Gov. Chiles Innovation Fund. Agenciessubmit proposals for improvements and the Department funds the top five.Quality AssurancePete Digre from the California-based Youth Law Center introduced himself and providedthe following opening remarks:3

• Secretary Butterworth met with the Youth Law Center to get some new ideas andrequested technical assistance. Pete Digre has provided the Department withrecommendations related to quality management and continuous quality improvement.• There are indicators that should be tracked real-time that address outcomes (currentlystatistical in nature) and practice standards, based on research and experience.Recommendations address the best practice standards to be included.• Mr. Digre provided a brief overview of his recommendations to the Department:1. Early Services Intervention Staffing:• Community based care providers can work with the child abuseinvestigator to provide services to prevent removal or fast track totermination of parental rights.• Community based care providers are too much on the receiving end andshould be more involved in decisions of placement.• Discussion of there currently being no metric for community based careproviders to keep kids out of foster care.2. Understand the child right up front:• Screen the child for service and support needs, such as mental health,education, developmental, health, etc.• Identify and consider the needs and status of the family, such as criminalhistory, income, child welfare involvement.• Ensure the first place for the child is the right place. Consider the needsof children placed together.3. Access of caregiver to emergency services:• Immediate access to support and crisis intervention 24 hours a day/7days a week.• Will assist in maintaining placements of children.4. Child Visitation by caseworkers:• Currently, Florida’s performance is one of the best in the nation andtracking of this needs to continue.5. Engagement of the family:• Substantial and meaningful engagement of the family. Review progresstoward goals at least monthly.• New York has a good model.6. Family Visitation:• Children visit with parents and siblings.7. Healthcare:• Check-ups required medical care needs to be tracked.• Children in foster care have more illnesses than children who are not infoster care.8. Department of Education Agreement:4

• Agreements are good here in Florida.• The community based care provider, Hillsborough Kids, Inc. wasmentioned as a good model for collaboration with their local schools.• The law promotes stability/same school attendance, Individual EducationPlans and caregiver involvement. These are areas for continuedimprovement.9. Services for teens (age 14 and above):• Plans should be developed, reviewed and updated.• Services/supports and assessments should address and plan for livingplace, income, healthcare, etc after the youth exits foster care.10. Adoption Goals:• Currently exceeding targets• Need to track milestones of process from the time the child is free foradoption to finalization.11. Recruitment and retention of foster homes:• Targeted recruitment basis on data.• Focus on the children the community based care providers have(medical, mental health, behavioral needs, age, etc.).• Decrease foster home over capacity• Mr. Digre provided a brief overview of what he thought Florida was doing well andopportunities for improvement:What we are doing well:1. Sheriff offices doing protective investigations have a good peer reviewprocess.2. Community based care has been fully implemented3. The Department is taking quality assurance seriously and has 90 peopledoing QA work with a good infrastructure.4. Everyone is on the same team committed to having the best childwelfare system possible.Opportunities for improvement1. Reduce focus on some current indicators. Increase focus on bestpractice standards (for healthcare and child well-being) that drive goodoutcomes.2. Increase focus on the family engagement and visitation of children withparents and siblings.3. Understand the child’s needs and family structure right up front, as earlyas possible. Use team meetings with family and a variety relevantprofessionals to identify and address service and support needs andensure the first placement is the right placement. Use Oakland,California Children’s Hospital as a model.Discussion and Statements:5

• It was stated that there is a lot of time spent identifyingproblems/looking at things and less on changing them.• Mr. Digree stated you have to use data and look at practice. Thesecond tier of the Department’s current quality assurance process iswhere the changes should happen. Set targets, gather and reviewinformation from multiple sources and implement corrective action.• Quality Assurance reports are not routinely taking a critical look athow/if child could have been kept with the family.• Manatee County Sheriff office focuses a lot on the services within thecommunity to prevent removal. Protective investigators are askedwhat services and supports are needed that are not available.• A statement was made that collaboration is required across thesystem of care and at all levels. We should be solution focusedversus problem dissecting. We should focus on what we could havedone differently to get better results versus what did we/you dowrong.Discussion of Task Force Workgroup Assignments• Judge Gooding, Vice Chair of the Task Force, discussed the Task Force workgroupassignments. The Department has assigned staff to provide support and assistance.Task Force members can add anyone to their workgroup they feel would be beneficial totheir workgroup.• It was suggested that an additional workgroup be added related to child location andrecovery. Task Force members Donna Uzzell and Connie Schingledecker were assignedto the child location and recovery workgroup.Department Initiatives:Pat Badland, Director of Family Safety, Florida Department of Children and Familiesreviewed some of the Department’s current initiatives:1. Second Party Review Training: Developing requirements and associated trainingfor the completion of second party reviews by supervisors on cases internal to theDepartment.2. Dependency Summit Action Plans: Circuits will have break-out sessions wherethey will complete actions plans of how they will address specific issues, such ashome studies, children at hearing, and court dockets.3. Quality Assurance: As a result of the Department’s reorganization, qualityassurance staff are reporting to the Regional Director and not Tallahassee. TheDepartment’s quality assurance plans is being reviewed and redesigned, based onrecommendations from Pete DiGree.4. Placement Stability: Florida has not done well on the performance measureassociated with placement stability, is under a corrective action plan and is facingfinancial penalties of 2 to 3 million dollars a quarter.• Florida, Texas and California are in the same situation and are discussing thefinancial penalties with the Administration for Children and Families, Health andHuman Services. Taking money from states will not assist in solving this issue.6

• If Florida has to pay a financial penalty, it will impact the community based careproviders in some way that is yet to be determined.5. Florida Safe Families Network implementation: The first phase of the newDepartment electronic record system has been implemented. Phase two is underdevelopment.• Discussion:• The relationship between community based care providers and the Department wasdiscussed. The statement was made that the Department cannot stayfixed/unchanging and everything else change. In order for the community based careproviders to achieve and maintain improvement over time, the Department need totransform as well.Public Comments1. Melissa Page-Bailie: President, Florida Foster Adoptive Parent Association, Inc.presented to the Task Force on behalf of the Florida Foster Adoptive Parent Associationand provided the following information:• History of the Florida Foster Adoptive Parent Association.• The Florida State Foster Adoptive Parent Association was formed in 1986 to bringtogether parents in an effort to find support and resolutions to the problems thatfoster parents were struggling with. Today, there are over 9,200 foster parents inthe state and are the voice for over 19,000 children in care.• The Board members are volunteers.• Per the American Academy of Pediatrics:• Abuse impacts a child’s physical health;• Disabled children are two times more likely to be abused;• More than 100,000 children are abused every year…what about their future?• Three Recommendations were made to the Task Force:• Improve Services:♦ Counselors and foster parents have to fight to obtain therapeutic services forchildren.♦ Often time, adoptions are held up due to negotiations of medical boardrates. Adoptive parents have to fight for every dime.♦ Educational Support: children loose four months of educational progresswith every move and 50% of children in foster care drop out of school priorto graduation.• Standardize Reports, Forms, Processes:♦ There are 22 community based care providers around the state and they alluse their own forms, reports and processes for things such as licensing,training, adoption subsidy applications.♦ The Florida State Foster Adoptive Parent Association would like tocollaborate to assist in developing standard forms and reports.• Normalcy:♦ It is difficult to find funds to allow children to participate in sports, arts, etc.The benefit to children outweighs the cost.♦ The board is barely enough to fund food, shelter and clothing. Recreationalactivities are so important, but there is little/no money to fund them.7

• Discussion:• The suggestion was made that we need to make sure we have a standardbase/standards of practice and some flexibility.• The statement was made that some communities have a tax required in statute forthe purpose of providing after school activities to children in the community.• The recommendation was made that there needs to be a basic standard and levelof expectation for all children and youth in foster care across the state and afterschool activities should be included.2. Ms. Perez, Parent: Ms. Perez is from Miami Dade and spoke to the Task Force as aparent and grandparent of children in the system. Ms. Perez made the followingstatements and recommendations:• Heard a lot of positive statements today about how the Department is improving thestructure. The Department needs to improve starting at the bottom, with the staff thatworks directly with people.• Parents are failing because there is not enough money to access services to addressissues such as domestic violence. In addition, there is not enough staff to oversee andassist with what is happening. Her grandchildren were moved around multiple times.• Main Concern: The Department and community based care agencies need to startlistening to parents, families and children. No one listens to them. The old Departmentworked with us.• Children are medicated to make them compliant and address their behavior and pills arenot the answer. Her own child was suicidal while on mediations. Doctors prescribemedication cocktails.• There are too many children in foster care and not enough services. The issue is not justbad parents.• Ms. Perez provided the Task Force with a DVD related to the negative side effects ofmedications for children and how to reduce the use.• There needs to be more focus on the family and resources.Closing Remarks1. The next Task Force meeting has been tentatively scheduled for September 20 inBroward County.2. Next Steps for the Task Force Work Groups:• Staff assigned to provide support will contact the lead within the next week.• Task Force members assigned to the workgroups need to determine whom else fromaround the state they need to include. Can include anyone they feel would benefit.• The suggestions were made to add a sixth workgroup to address child location andrecovery, specifically the possible use of DNA to identify children only if needed.Major Connie Schingledecker, Manatee County Sheriffs Office and Donna Uzzell,Florida Department of Law Enforcement will be assigned to this workgroup. Ms.Uzzell is assigned as the lead.AdjournmentJudge Gooding, Vice Chair of the Task Force thanked everyone for presenting and attendingand adjourned the meeting.8

Task Force on Child ProtectionMeeting AgendaSeptember 20, 20079:00 – 3:00Call to Order and Welcoming RemarksState Attorney Barry Krischer, ChairReview of Pending DCF LegislationPat Badland, Director, Office of Family Safety• Comprehensive Reform of Child Protection• Community based care lead agency contingency planGeorge Sheldon, Assistant Secretary for Operations• Public recordsJim Sewell• Human Service Information Systems CouncilDiscussionCommunity Based Care White PaperDave Bundy, President/CEO, Children’s Home SocietyPresentationFlorida Children’s FirstAndrea Moore, Executive Director, Florida Children FirstStatus Brief by WorkgroupsWorkgroup Leads1. Home Study Form/Process and Implementation2. Out of County Services3. Child Protection Investigation to Services Transition4. Systems of Care5. Stabilization and Permanency6. Child Recovery and Operation Safe Kids Follow-upDiscussionPreliminary Report to Sec. ButterworthJim Sewell2:00 – 3:00Public CommentsAdjournment

Task Force on Child ProtectionMeeting SummaryNova Southeastern University, Ft. LauderdaleSeptember 20, 2007Call to Order and Welcoming Remarks• State Attorney Barry Krischer, Chairman of the Task Force, opened the meeting and welcomed theparticipants• Chairman Krischer commented that he was not able to attend the previous meeting due to a familycommitment but understood from Judge Gooding that the meeting was well attended and productive• Chairman Krischer shared the dates and locations of the next two meetings: October 10 inJacksonville and November 2 in Ft. Myers• Chairman Krischer referred the members to the agenda for the first presentationReview of Pending DCF LegislationComprehensive Reform of Child Protection and Lead Agency Contingency Plan• Pat Badland, Director, Office of Family Safety commented on the highlights of the proposedlegislation• For more detailed information, see handout entitled, “2008 Agency Proposal, Priority #2”• The following proposals were mentioned:1. Requiring law enforcement to accept missing children reports2. Tightening the judicial scrutiny of non-relative placements3. Providing exceptions to the 60-day closure of child protective investigations4. Providing proper notice of hearings for foster parents5. Addressing discrepancies in background screening requirements for various caregivers6. Broadening the opportunity for injunctions in domestic violence situations7. Clarifying accountability for lead agenciesSecretary Butterworth’s Welcome and Introduction of Senator Nan Rich• Secretary Butterworth welcomed the Task Force and the meeting observers to Broward County• He commented that it was a great pleasure to recognize Senator Rich, a true friend of theDepartment and that she had sponsored legislation on behalf of the Department with tenacity andcompassion• Senator Rich commented that she was glad the Task Force was meeting in her back yard andaffirmed her tremendous commitment to services for children• She indicated that she was thrilled Secretary Butterworth had brought together this group of qualified,experienced people to look at child welfare• Senator Rich commented on the potential for across the board budget cuts and indicated that shewas never a proponent especially in light of the compounded damage in Health and Human Servicesdue to the additional loss of federal dollars• She indicated that Secretary Butterworth did a fabulous job of presenting the Department’s plan forcuts and that the most recent indications are that the cuts will be 212 million instead of 309 milliondollars• Senator Rich further commented that she was being cautious; but believed direct services would bespared during the upcoming special session. However, a billion dollar cut will be addressed duringthe regular session for 2008 session• She concluded her remarks saying that she looked forward to working with the Secretary and theTask Force and would consider looking at new sources of revenueReview of Pending DCF Legislation (continued)Public Records1

• George Sheldon, Assistant Secretary for Operations thanked Senator Rich for her work on behalf ofyouth aging out of foster care and to the Secretary for his commitment to transparency at theDepartment• Mr. Sheldon referenced a Palm Beach Post article chastising the Legislature for considering acrossthe board cuts and the newspaper comment that the Legislature should take guidance from the newDepartment on common sense• He commented on the huge transition that this story represented and how glad he was the terms,“troubled” and “beleaguered” were avoided by the press• Mr. Sheldon commented on the Secretary’s mantra of openness and referenced comments from theSecretary’s speech at the Dependency Summit, September 5, 2007, including that the Departmenthas nothing to hide and that the Department will not hide behind confidentiality laws• He explained that the Department cannot correct inaccurate information without successfullypetitioning the court to open up records, and that in a recent instance in Ft. Myers, the Departmenthad requested that records be opened and the newspaper reviewed those records and reported thesituation fairly with both positive and critical remarks• This resulted in skyrocketing staff morale• In the Courtney Clark case, the primary reason for this Task Force being appointed, the Departmentpetitioned the court and released records in order for the Department and community-based careagencies (CBC) to learn and improve• As Secretary of the Department, Mr. Butterworth administers a 4 billion dollar budget, he must havethe authority to make the judgment call to open up records• Mr. Sheldon explained that the Department recognizes the need for safeguards and is proposing a 5-day notice period prior to releaseHe continued with the following bulleted comments:• The Guardian Ad Litem plays a key role in protecting the child’s rights to his/her records and ensuringproper release of records• The burden must be on openness• The Department also intends to add language to Chapter 985, Florida Statutes, to ensure appropriaterecord sharing with the Department of Juvenile Justice• The need is for the Department to share records with and receive records from the Departments ofEducation, Revenue - Child Support Enforcement, and the Agency for Persons with Disabilities• The burden should not be on the courts to determine the appropriate agency for services provisionbut instead on interagency collaboration for the most effective service delivery• The Department fully supports children’s rights to receive their own records when they age out offoster care and recognizes the need for records for insurance, employment, driver’s license, etc• Children must know who they are and how they got here• The Rights and Expectations of Children in Foster Care brochure recently published by theDepartment includes this right of a child to his/her own records• The Department supports strengthened statutory language holding agencies accountable whenrecords are not shared appropriately• A proposal is being developed for the Governor’s Commission on Open Government to ensurecommunity-based care agencies have equal access to records and are equally liable if records arenot shared appropriately• The bottom line is that unless laws are changed, the Department will continue to be constrained inthis matter• The Department is striving to improve quality of its services through a new spirit of openness andtransparency• More has happened in recent months on this issue and the Department is committed toaccomplishing more• A recent change in policy provides for the Hotline to take reports of abuse/neglect even when alocation of the child is not known if there are other means to locate the child – the Department’s firstcommitment is child safety2

• Mr. Sheldon concluded his remarks by saying the “them verses us” mentality must be eliminated –the Department must partner with community-based care agencies to accomplish these objectives• The entire child welfare service system must adopt a sense of urgency• The significant lesson in the Courtney Clark case is that staff must pick up the phone when emailsare not being addressed and child safety is at stake• In response to some questions, Mr. Sheldon shared plans for the Child Location Specialists and theDirector position at headquarters to coordinate the partnership with the Departments of JuvenileJustice, Agency for Persons with Disabilities, Criminal Justice, etc.Review of Pending DCF LegislationHuman Services Information Systems Council• Dr. Jim Sewell, Special Consultant to Secretary Butterworth and DCF, explained that the issue ofcomputers “not” talking to one another has been explored for the last 8 ½ months• The Department is proposing that this gap be bridged by instituting a strategy similar to the CriminalJustice Information System (CJIS) Council• This will allow the Departments of Corrections, Education, Juvenile Justice, Highway Safety, etc. tosend/receive communication with the Department of Children and Families• The CJIS statute has served law enforcement agencies well• It is “silly” that agencies cannot crosswalk information and the inclusion with substance abuse, andmental health services is also needed• The Department intends to work with the Executive Office of the Governor to propose legislativechangesPresentation: Community-Based Care White Paper• The following were introduced:Dave Bundy, Children’s Home Society President and Chief Executive OfficerBill Frye, Florida Sheriff’s Youth Ranches, Inc.Charlie Cox, Florida Baptist Children’s Home, Inc.Amy Simpson, Girls and Boys Town, Inc.• Mr. Bundy indicated that he had heard that the white paper had stirred up some controversy andmisinterpretation• He stated he wanted to clearly communicate that this was not a criticism of community-based careand went on to say they wanted to build on the successes of community-based care and to continuebenefiting from the volunteers in our communities• The white paper is not an all or nothing proposition and that all do not embrace everyrecommendation• Mr. Bundy introduced Mr. Frye and asked him to continue• Mr. Frye explained that his agency, Florida Sheriff’s Youth Ranch does not provide casemanagement services• He explained that the role of community-based care lead agencies is a limited role and that thereshould be limited instances when case management services are provided in-house• Mr. Frye continued that the community-based care system is one in which partnerships aremanaged to ensure a viable, diverse level of services to better meet the needs• He stated that the current direction is to bring services in-house and create 22 “Departments” ratherthan one large Department• Mr. Frye emphasized that the lead agency role is to manage and to avoid provision of in-houseservices• They propose protecting the existing four to five lead agencies that provide case management inhouse• Mr. Frye shared the example of the Partnership for Strong Families lead agency as an excellent leadagency• He shared that the Partnership for Strong Families contracts out case management and this ensuresa strong quality assurance role by the lead agency3

• Mr. Frye commented that in the future, lead agencies should be prohibited from providing casemanagement services in-house• He explained that legislation is necessary to ensure the community is represented not by one singleboard and that accountability is strengthened when lead agencies manage the system and otheragencies provide case management• Mr. Bundy concluded the overall presentation by commenting that the spirit of dialogue helps todefine the term, “community”, and stated that the statute should address a process for defining how acommunity structures its system of care• Mr. Frye added that community-based care agencies should not be allowed to raise funds with taxdollars• Mr. Cox commented on the accreditation status of his agency and the various monitoring processesconducted on his agencies• He shared that they experience difficulties with the current level of monitoring and monitoring effortsneed to be coordinated and consistent• Mr. Frye added that a false sense of security exists when the correct balance of monitoring is not inplace• There needs to be right balance between safety and documentationTask Force comments or questions:• Why is legislation necessary• Why take away discretion from communities to choose own model? Why limit choice? Why set aprecedent by prescribing a structure for community-based care• Who is accountable in the various models when lead agencies provide case management in-houseor not• The community alliance should have the role of designing the system of care• The conversation should not be about ensuring non-profit agencies stay in business• What is the appropriate level of monitoring? Who monitors the lead agency when case managementis delivered in-house• What prevents lead agencies from being “held hostage” by case management providers• If looking at the administrative services organization model, why limit choice• What is the appropriate distribution of risk? Financial risk• Why limit or restrict fund raising at the local level• The Department has the ultimate responsibility• The Administrative Services Organization must manage down• All models/aspects of privatization have not been thoroughly explored in terms of accountability, cost,and responsibility• The return to the state as the overall manager is not appropriate• The appropriate response to the question, “who is responsible” is that “we are responsible”• Lead agencies must provide the leadership and management role and provide the buffer to casemanagement organizations• The contracts must contain specific criteria and expectations for accountability• The appropriate relationship between DCF and lead agencies is that of partner not vendor• Creativity and innovation is driven by the leadership of the Department• The culture of blame is persuasive• The lead agency and community need flexibility to structure the business of child welfare• Monitoring by a national organization is not sufficientPresentation: Community-Based Care Lead Agencies• The following were introduced:Steven Murphy, Partnership for Strong Families CEO and Jim Stringfellow, Board of DirectorsRon Zychowski, Community Partnership for ChildrenJeff Rainey, Hillsborough Kids CEO, and Mindy Murphy, Board of Directors4

Nadereh Salim, Children’s Network of Southwest Florida and Stan Appelbaum, Local AdvisoryCouncil• Mr. Murphy commented that they wanted to set the record straight that eight of the workforce/earlylearning coalitions provide services directly and that Childnet is not reorganizing but has had achange in leadership• Mr. Murphy shared that his lead agency, Partnership for Strong Families is the first to be accreditedfollowed by KCI, Inc.• Mr. Murphy commented that case management is the heart and soul of child welfare and that Floridais unique in contracting out case management• He added that in most states case management is a government responsibility and that there isstrength in having partnerships• Mr. Murphy concluded his remarks with the remark that oversight of case management must be dailyand hands on to be effective• Mr. Stringfellow described the forming of their board, the easing providers off of the board, and theinclusion of the finest minds and experience available to provide not for profit governance• Mr. Stringfellow commented on the big picture not being addressed by the Legislature and the needto do that• Ms. Murphy shared the process for planning the system of care in Hillsborough County• She commented on the improved locally designed system of care and the dramatic differences thathave occurred• Ms. Murphy added that communities need to be continue to make decisions about system design atthe local level• Mr. Applebaum commented on the success of children’s services councils• He added that all of us need to remember we are dealing with children’s lives at an individual level• Mr. Applebaum added that more community involvement is needed• He expressed concerns about the speed in which children are reunified and the need for safety to bethe primary concern• Mr. Zychowski added that most of his comments have already been said• He wanted to acknowledge that community-based care would not have occurred if it were not forChildren’s Home Society and Mr. Bundy• Mr. Zychowski indicated that there has been significant progress in consolidating and integratingeffective monitoring• He added that the real problem is not the volume of monitoring but that it is not as effective as itneeds to be – staff need to be trained to see early signs and to communicate effectively• Ms. Salim described the process for developing their system of care• She described success as whatever size best fits the community – not one size fits all• Ms. Salim described the successful network of dentists that are providing services in her community• She commented that this is not about the lead agency as a provider agency but about communitiessupporting the best possible care for its children• Written comments from the Brevard CBC Board of Directors were provided to the Chair of the TaskForceTask Force Comments and Questions• The work of this task force should not be about band-aid approaches but about legislative resourcesfor proactive programming• Leadership cannot be designed through legislation• The focus should be on primary prevention and early intervention and the conversation should beabout keeping children out of community-based care child welfare programs• There needs to be a balance in the return of children to their families – the rights of children and therights of their parents must both be considered• The child’s sense of time must be consideredPresentation: Florida’s Children First, Inc.!5

• Andrea Moore, Executive Director, Florida’s Children First, Inc. was introduced• Ms. Moore provided two documents for the Task Force: 1) Narrative remarks prepared (30 pages)and 2) Powerpoint presentation entitled, “Protecting Children and Improving Outcomes”• Ms. Moore used the powerpoint to focus her comments and proceeded through the slidesTask Force Comments:• Agreed with Ms. Moore’s presentation and challenged the collective “us” to work together for systemchange• Advocates and child welfare staff do not have to sit on different sides of the table and takeadversarial roles but instead should collaborate for meaningful reform• The current comprehensive behavioral health assessment is not designed for young children• All assessments need to contain a stronger look at the families as well as the children• Requested Ms. Moore’s comment on holding community-based care agencies accountable and sheresponded, she does not recommend that the Department micromanage but does recommend thatthe Department implement measurable performance standards• A system needs to be designed to provide support and technical assistance with means for providersto learn from their mistakes• There needs to be consequences for overspending millions of dollars• The Department needs the support of good transaction attorneys and contracts need to be written inplain languageStatus Brief by Workgroups• Home Study Workgroup report provided by Pat Badland• Group is focused on the document itself as well as the process for completion, review, andsubmission• They are using the work of groups convened for Florida Safe Families Network to standardize theprocess• They are also using the work of judicial circuit breakouts from the Dependency Summit 9/5-7/07inform their recommendations• Next step – to develop a matrix of background screening requirements and to provide the templatefor review by stakeholders• Out-of-County Services Workgroup report provided by Alan Abramowitz• Group is reviewing current policy and requesting input from circuit administrators and communitybasedcare managers• Group plans a common sense approach• Permanency and Stabilization Workgroup report provided by Jim Kallinger• Group recognizes the contributions of guardians ad litem to the effort and advocates for their support• The group plans to build a plan around four major themes - prevention, diversion, reunification,targeted recruitment• The group aims to develop practical solutions for long term challenges both at the state and nationallevel• Identify characteristics of successful foster parents• Recovery Workgroup provided by Connie Shingledecker• Group is reviewing Operations SafeKids recommendations to determine barriers to implementation• Group recommends developing a template for a memo of understanding between law enforcementand DCF• Group recommends a subcommittee be created of Florida Sheriff’s Association, Florida PoliceChief’s Association, DCF, and FDLE to determine strategies for reporting missing children• Workgroups focused on system of care/oversight issues and investigations to services hand-off toreport next meeting6

Discussion: Preliminary Report to Secretary Butterworth• Dr. Jim Sewell, Special Consultant to Secretary Butterworth and DCF, guided the discussion• The Department proposes a small group (Shingledecker, Ebbole, and Casel) of the Task Forcedevelop a preliminary report• A draft to be ready for review by October 8• Task Force members are asked to provide specific recommendations to Jim SewellPublic Comment• Chris Card, Providence Corporation, thanked the Task Force for the good discussion• Commented that each child must be looked at individually as well as the systemic review• Mr. Card proposed one primary recommendation: to establish a child welfare estimating conference• He concluded that expectations cannot be met if the resources are not available to meet the need• Steve Rios, Educate Tomorrow, recommended increased attention to outcome analysisClosing RemarksJudge Gooding thanked all for their attendance and reminded the group that the next Task Force onChild Protection meeting is scheduled for October 10 in Jacksonville7

Task Force on Child ProtectionJacksonville City Council ChambersOctober 10, 20079:00 – 3:00AgendaCall to Order and Welcoming RemarksState Attorney Barry Krischer, ChairModel: Keeping Siblings TogetherGordon Johnson, President and CEONeighbor to Family, Inc.Child Welfare Legal ServicesMary Cagle, DirectorChildren’s Legal Services, DCFConcept PaperA Radical Change In the Foster Care SystemNancy Dreicer, Regional DirectorNortheast RegionEducation and Foster Care ChildrenCollaboration with Community Advisory PanelJim Adams, CEOFamily Support ServicesLunch BreakReview and DiscussionTask Force Preliminary ReportJim Sewell2:00 – 3:00Public CommentsAdjournmentState Attorney Barry Krischer, Chair

Task Force on Child ProtectionMeeting SummaryJacksonville City Council ChambersOctober 10, 2007Call to Order and Welcoming Remarks♦ State Attorney Barry Krischer, Chairman, of the Task Force, opened the meeting andwelcomed the participants.PowerPoint Presentation:Model: Keeping Siblings Together♦ Task Force member Alan Abramowitz, 18 th Circuit Administrator introduced GordonJohnson, President and CEO of the Neighbor to Family Program and provided thefollowing information regarding his background:- He served for seven years as the Secretary of the child welfare agency in Illinois.- He was instrumental in the development of the One Church, One Child Program.- He has been recognized by Harvard University for innovation in keeping siblingstogether. He received an award for his work in keeping siblings together andsubsequent awards are named in his honor.♦ Mr. Johnson introduced himself. He thanked Secretary Butterworth and AssistantSecretary of Operations George Sheldon for the invitation to present to the Task Force.♦ Mr. Johnson stated his presentation would include two biological parents who receivedservices from the Neighbor to Family Program and a professional foster caregiver whoworks for Neighbor to Family.♦ Mr. Johnson provided the following information regarding Neighbor to Family:• Neighbor to Family was developed because:- Of the 588,000 children in foster care in the United States, 55% - 69% havesiblings.- 50% - 60% siblings in care are separated and not placed together- Percent of children placed in foster care with all siblings are as follows:• 2 children – 54%• 3 children – 38.7%• 4 children – 27.1%• 5 children – 17%• 6 + children – 11.2%.- Children are cherry picked by some foster caregivers. Since resources arelimited foster caregivers can be more selective about what children they willaccept.- Research on the impact of sibling separation in foster care indicates:• Siblings are more likely to remain in their first placement withoutdisruption if they are placed together;• If siblings are not placed together initially, the chance of reunion in apermanent placement is greatly diminished.1

• Overview of Neighbor to Family:• The program was created in 1994 by Gordon Johnson as a siblingfoster care program at Jane Hull House Association in Chicago.• The Neighbor to Family program came to Daytona Beach in 1998 vialegislation championed by Senator Evelyn Lynn.• Accredited by Council on Accreditation in September, 2005.• Locations in Florida are Daytona Beach, Orlando and Miami-Dade.• Distinctive Features of the program:• Foster parents are carefully selected and well trained (50 hoursrequired training); they are considered professional foster parents;• Neighbor to Family utilizes the team conferencing concept;• They encourage biological families, including birth fathers, to activelyparticipate with their children and the program;• Intake into the program is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week;• No reject/no eject placements;• The program encourages the empowerment of family developmenttoward self-sufficiency and;• Sibling adoptions.- Prospective employees are given a series of tests to determine the bestcandidates for the job. Emotional-Social Intelligence Inventory is anexample of the tests given.-- Unique program features:• Siblings placed together with one family at a time;• Foster parents are salaried members of the Service Delivery Team.They are provided with relevant training opportunities and 24/7support from professional counselors;• Biological families are provided with wrap around services andsupports. They participate in monthly in the Family Team Meetings;• Outcomes:Average length of stay in Foster Care:• National: 33 months• Florida: 23.7 months• Neighbor to Family:Daytona Beach: 9.74 monthsOrlando: 4.9 monthsMiami: 6 months- Outside Evaluations: Several evaluations have been done on the programwith positive results.♦ Mr. Gordon introduced professional foster parent Kathleen Bushong.♦ Ms. Bushong introduced herself. She stated it was an honor for her to be here and to beable to speak on behalf of children and families. Ms. Bushong provided the Task Forcewith the following observations about her experience in being a foster parent withNeighbor to Family:- She has been with Neighbor to Family for 7 years and was previously abusiness owner.2

- Children come into the system have done nothing wrong, yet they are theones punished the most.- She spoke about Jane Adams’ work with poor families and her opening ofthe Hull House in the slums of Chicago in 1889.- She is a “professional” foster parent. She spoke about the hiring andtraining process for foster parents with the Neighbor to Family Program.She stated that anytime she sees a need for training, Mr. Johnson is opento providing it.- Foster parents get as much history on the child and family as is available inorder to make their home more user friendly for them.- The foster parents keep the children safe while the parents complete theirtasks. In the program parents come into their homes to visit with thechildren and are able to fix dinner for their children, for example.- The program feels it is important for the parents to give their childrenpermission to stay with the foster parents. The foster and biological worktogether like a large family.- Life books are created for each child in the program. These life bookscontain pictures of the child’s life, such as their family. It gives kidssomething to physically hold on to while there are not with their family.- Ms. Bushong made the following closing statements:• Please keep siblings together. We need to do what is best for thechildren.• Children come with their belongings in trash bags and leave withsuitcases.♦ Mr. Gordon introduced Tiffany Jackson. She is a mother who completed the Neighbor toFamily program.Ms. Jackson discussed her experience with the Neighbor to Family Program.- Neighbor to Family is just that.- Ms. Jackson stated her three children were very young when they came intostate custody in 2001. Her children were separated until the Neighbor toFamily Program brought them together in the same home.- She was able to contact workers when needed. The worker called daily justto check on her and see if she needed anything. Neighbor to Family has ateam that works together to rebuild you.- She gained stability and was able to get her children back. She stillmaintains contact with her caseworker, the children’s foster mother andNeighbor to Family personnel three and a half years after her case wasclosed.- She stated that the Neighbor to Family Program helped her get her childrenback. They continue to work with her to keep them from coming back intocare.- The best thing she felt the Neighbor to Family Program did was to focus onthe children and her. They helped her become the best “Tiffany” she couldbe.♦ Mr. Gordon introduced Roland Thomas: He is a parent who completed the Neighbor toFamily Program.♦ Mr. Thomas spoke his experience with the Neighbor to Family program.3

- Mr. Thomas stated his four children entered state care in 2004. His childrenwere placed in 3 different homes and they all could not attend the visits dueto transportation issues.- His case plan was overwhelming and he never saw his caseworker.- In January, 2005 his children were placed with the Neighbor to Familyprogram and he attended the first Team Meeting.- He met the whole team at the first meeting. He was offered services andmost were available at the same location where the children were located.He had an advocate that assisted him with his case plan. He felt betterabout the foster parents and was able to interact with them as his mentors.- His children came back to his home in 2005 and they live in the sameneighborhood as his children’s former foster parents. The foster parents arestill very involved in his and the children’s lives in a supportive way.- He stated the Neighbor to Family staff gave him hope. He stated “I don’tthink I would have gotten my children back without them”.Task Force Discussion/Questions:1. One of the Task Force members stated he was shocked that he had not heard of theNeighbor to Family Program before. The question was asked about what happens when itis necessary to terminate parents’ right: Do foster parents adopt?- Mr. Gordon stated foster parents can adopt. Neighbor to Family does concurrentplanning as a fall back. They know within the first few months if a parent will beable to complete their case plan and get their children back. Some parents realizethey cannot care for their children and voluntarily relinquish their parental rights.2. How does the cost of 24 months in care compare to what Neighbor to Family spends upfront on services and supports for 9 – 12 months?- Mr. Gordon stated there is no way to isolate the cost of food, shelter, clothing etc.provided to children in addition to the room and board rate. The wide array ofservices provided to children and families are contracted through Neighbor toFamily.3. What is the case load size?- Twenty children for each caseworker; consistent with the Council on Accreditationstandards.4. What is the rate of recidivism beyond one year?- Hard to get. We follow-up with families six months after they complete theprogram. Recidivism is low at that termination.5. What is the rate of children reunified versus those children whose parent’s rights areterminated?- 40% - 50% of children are reunified with parents. The rest are placed with relativesor adopted.6. A Task Force member stated she was concerned we have to justify/compare a program,such as Neighbor to Family to current costs. Currently, money is spent on other programsthat don’t work.7. A Task Force member asked have there has been any safety issues with having parentsso involved with the foster families? Have any parents tried to take their children?- There have been no incidents of parents taking their children.8. How does Neighbor to Family find foster parents to do this work?- Neighbor to Family usually has a waiting list of potential foster parents. They have85% - 95% retention of foster parents and are very selective.4

9. Is there a type of family and/or circumstances Neighbor to Family is more successfulwith?- No difference, unless there are major criminal or egregious abuse issues.10. Is the 50 hour required foster parent training annual?- Yes. Consultants are hired from the outside if necessary to provide training.Specialized training is offered to deal with current issues.11. Have you managed to replicate a program of this kind?- Mr. Gordon responded: it is always something we have to work on. We alwaysmonitor and continuously evaluate.12. A Task Force member commented that the beauty of the design we have in Florida withthe Community Based Care and Medicaid models is that other lead agencies will followwith the Neighbor to Family model. It is good for kids and makes good business sense.13. Comment: The Community Alliance drove the expansion of the program.Child Welfare Legal Services♦ George Sheldon, Assistant Secretary for Operations addressed the Task Force regardingthe realignment of child welfare legal services and made the following statements:- The House and Senate gave the Department the flexibility to reorganize.- Secretary Butterworth early on identified the importance of lawyers in themental health arena and how critical they are to child protection.- There are 400 lawyers for the Department statewide.- After some discussion, it became apparent that transferring legal servicesto the Attorney General and State Attorney offices would not happenstatewide.- It was necessary for the Department to build a law firm and review howlegal services were being delivered.- George Sheldon introduced Mary Cagle as the new State Director for ChildLegal Services. Mrs. Cagle will report directly to George Sheldon.♦ Mary Cagle thanked the Task Force for allowing her to present today and provided a briefoverview of her background:- She worked for Janet Reno for 22 years in the Miami-Dade State AttorneyGeneral’s Office. She became Chief Assistant for Ms. Reno and was able tobe involved in social service issues.- She served as the CEO for the CHARLEE program in Miami for the pastfour years.- She discussed the difficulties encounter during the “rolling out” ofcommunity based care in Miami.- She stated Secretary Butterworth contacted her and requested she come towork for the Department as the State Director of Child Legal Services. Sheaccepted his offer.- She participated in the Legal Review Workgroup established by SecretaryButterworth to review how legal services are currently being delivered andmake recommendations for improvement. A draft copy of the Report of theDepartment of Children and Families Legal Workgroup was provided to theTask Force.5

• The history of legal services was reviewed and it was found that notmuch has changed over the last five years.• Legal services are working well in some areas and not as well inothers.• The places where legal services were outsourced seemed to be moreeffective, possibly because they recruit high quality attorneys andprovide professional development.♦ Mary Cagle outlined the following recommendations that will guide improvements:1. Create a statewide Department of Children and Families law firm. Keycomponents are training/professional development and recruitment.2. Implement a prosecution model:• Represent the Department in the best interest of children, includingdefining who is the client.• Attorneys need to ask questions from case managers, who are theeyes and ears of the system to determine specific efforts made toprevent removal and ensure there is urgency in permanencyplanning.Task Force Discussion/Questions:1. Task Force member asked where are the assurances this model will be funded when theynever have in the past.- Mary Cagle responded that she cannot give assurances that funding fromthe legislature will be provided.- George Sheldon stated the Secretary and Legislature are committed toadequately funding children services.2. A Task Force member statements:- The child welfare system has drastically changed over recent years, but thelegal services have stayed the same.- Need to make sound recommendations and back with resources andfunding.- The model proposed is good. Consistency across the state is needed onhow cases are handled. Suggestion was made to craft language for thelegislature to address problems if things don’t work.- Mary Cagle has many strengths and comes from a Community Based Careperspective and has the possibility of being creative.- They are excited to see change. Ethical obligations/prosecution versusclient rights must have excellence in legal services because the stakes areso high.- They commend Secretary Butterworth and George Sheldon for their effortsand Mary Cagel for her enthusiasm.Concept PaperA Radical Change in the Foster Care System♦ State Attorney Barry Krischer, Chair, introduced Nancy Dreicer, Regional Director for theNortheast Zone.♦ Ms. Dreicer thanked the Task Force members for their time. She came to the Departmentfrom the corporate world and has a unique perspective: if a process is broken, try tochange it. If that doesn’t work, change it.6

♦ Ms. Dreicer provided the Task Force with a power point presentation of her concept paper“If it’s Broke, Fix It” as highlighted below.- Incremental versus radical change:• There is a need to change our system. Ms. Dreicer proposed eliminatingfoster care as we know it.• Change has been incremental for so long is has complicated thesystem.• Radical change can result in better performance if done right.• We have to consider the child at risk with family versus the risk they faceby being removed. Studies show that at risk children with their family dobetter than children in foster care.• A study done by Chapin Hall showed that children in foster care havehigher rates of delinquency, pregnancy, substance abuse, and levelsof internalizing problems than children in the general population.- Workflow• Investigative process would remain the same.• As to services there would be three paths the family could follow.• Path One would be if there is egregious abuse/neglect, the child wouldbe removed and placed with a relative or in a pre-adoptive placement,pursue expedited termination of parental rights and case worker wouldwork to get the child adopted within months.• Path Two would be if there is non-egregious abuse/neglect, the familywould get in-home services and a diversionary court order would beobtained. The parent would face court contempt charges if they did notcomply with the case plan and child(ren) placed into Path One.• Path Three would be respite care for 3-4 months. This path would beutilized in case such as some domestic violence situations where thechild(ren) might need to be removed for safety reasons.- Funding:Other than start up funds, the Title IV-E Waiver would support theinitiative.- Marketing: The initiative would need to be marketed to the general publicand media. This would allow the public to understand the concept and agreeto take a risk.- Ms. Dreicer proposed an initial pilot program for Duval & Levy Counties.These two counties were chosen due to their size, with one large county andone small county to assess the program on both scales.- What is needed to proceed with a pilot in Duval and Levy counties:• Ms. Dreicer outlined a plan to implement the initiative startingimmediately, which includes the convening of a workgroup in Duvalwith local partners and support from Tallahassee.Task Force Discussion/Questions:1. Suggestion from a Task Force member: Develop tools to decide which path a childshould take. Use information gathered from the Child Death Review Team and includelaw enforcement. Donna Uzzell offered assistance on behalf of the Florida Department ofLaw Enforcement.• Ms. Dreicer agreed that up-front assessment is critical to this approach.7

2. Question from Task Force member: How do you measure success?• Suggested an outside independent evaluation be done.3. Comment from Task Force member: The pendulum for removing children has swung backand forth. Decisions should be made by getting the right information to make the rightdecision for the child. Decisions need to be data driven not anecdotally driven.4. Comment from Task Force member: Short respite placements would transform thesystem.5. A suggestion was made to look at children who have died, mostly under the age of five.These cases are complex. We need to look at what is truly risk and what already know.This is an opportunity to develop risk criteria that is age appropriate.Education and Foster Care Children: Collaboration with Community Advisory Panel♦ State Attorney Barry Krischer, Chair, introduced Jim Adams, CEO Family SupportServices.♦ Mr. Adams introduced two Independent Living students who spoke briefly about theireducational goals.♦ Mr. Adams presented to the Task Force on the importance of education stability forchildren in foster care. He outlined efforts they have made to ensure children’seducational needs are met.- Current situation:• There are 3000 children in foster care and 32 new children come inevery week• 60% or more of children in foster care drop out of high school• 11% continue their education after high school• Students change schools four or more times and lose 1 year ofeducation achievement.- Family Support Services of North Florida goals for children to be successfulin school:1. Child remains in school of origin2. Child is guaranteed a seamless transition when a change is needed.This is done through working agreements3. Children participate in non-academic activities4. Stakeholders advocate on behalf of children to get them the servicesand supports they need to keep from dropping out. Also, thecommunity gets involved, mentoring, etc.5. Children have at least one adult involved.6. Every child is given a backpack with essential school supplies.Task Force Discussion/Questions:1. Question: Are these (educational) goals required in contract or do you choose to dothem?- Mr. Adams: These are goals we chose to implement. This is a team approach.2. Comment by Task Force member: We need clarification on what is required instatute, rule and contract for agencies addressing children’s education needs.3. Question by Task Force member: How are the Comprehensive Behavioral HealthAssessments being used?4. Comment by Task Force member: This is a global issue.8

5. Suggestion by Task Force member: Partner with computer stores to providerefurbished computers to foster homes and youth in Independent Living.6. Comment by Task Force member: Palm Beach notifies schools the morning of when aparent gets arrested or a child removed so they can be aware when interacting withthat child.Review and Discussion: Task Force Preliminary Report♦ Jim Sewell facilitated a discussion with the Task Force to review the preliminary draftreport and provide feedback.- Mr. Sewell stated the report was drafted to provide information to those whowill read it to make sure they know where the Task Force was coming from,that the critical issues were addressed, the charges from SecretaryButterworth were addressed, and these items were to be used as a blueprint for improvement.- Minor suggestions were made by the Task Force members for revision.- Final draft will be submitted to the Task Force for approval at the November2 meeting in Ft. Myers.♦ The Task Force will continue to meet every other month in 2008. It will take time over thenext year to achieve dynamic change.- Proposed 2008 Task Force meeting dates will be sent to the Task Forcewithin the next couple of days for consideration.Public Comments1. Susan and Colonial Long, former foster parents addressed the Task Force. Theyprovided the panel with observations they had made while being foster parents.- The Longs had three foster children placed with them.- The Court reunified the children in the middle of the school semester and thechildren had to change schools.- The children came to them needing dental care. The little girl had head lice andthe children had nothing except the clothes on their backs.- The system makes it too easy to get children back. The mother of these childrencompleted a parenting class, but needed a lot more.- The children did not want to return to the mother.Task Force Discussion/Questions:1. Comment by Task Force member: We have explored the issue of foster parentsknowing all of the information about a child that is placed with them, including medicalneeds, etc.2. Suggestion by Task Force member: Pro Bono services by the Florida Association ofDentist should be explored.3. Ms. Long suggested that all Judges should talk to the children regardless of age.2. Mr. William Robinson, Youth Advocate Program, addressed the Task Force. He providedthe panel with what his program can do and how they can partner with child welfareagencies.9

- They receive referrals from the substance abuse office and the Department ofJuvenile Justice.- The program tries to bridge the gaps that exist in the child welfare programs due tohigh case loads and work with the child welfare case workers. It is a 24 hours aday/7 days a week program.- The Youth Advocate Program Parents sign an agreement to participate. Theprogram provides services and supports to the family and child. They teachessential skills such as social and job.- Once in the program, the participants can remain and receive services for life.3. Rick Wallace, Family Services, addressed the Task Force. He has been with theCommunity Based Care for eleven months. He wanted to provide a community basedcare prospective.- The average foster child is 1 to 2 years behind in school. They have limited skillsdue to the environments in which they lived.- We have to become as proactive as possible so they do not become dependent onthe system.- Provides tutorial services.- Put systems and processes in place so if systems fail, people won’t.Closing Remarks: George Sheldon, Assistant Secretary for Operations- The meeting in Ft. Myers will provide the opportunity for the public and otherstakeholders to comment on issues and suggestions for improvement.- The community has taken a strong interest in child welfare. There have been a fewhigh profile cases there that should have been handled differently and there hasbeen a recent change in leadership in that area.- Secretary Butterworth and Mr. Sheldon met with the community to discuss theirconcerns and the Secretary is committed to working with them.- Secretary Butterworth requested a management review be completed and theresults are pending. The review is assessing all aspects of the system there.AdjournmentState Attorney Barry Krischer, Chair thanked everyone for participating and adjourned themeeting.10

Family Safety Quality AssuranceReview of Courtney Alisa ClarkInitial FindingsIntroductionOn June 18, 2007, Secretary Bob Butterworth ordered a Quality Assurance reviewwhen he learned a missing Florida child had been located in the State ofWisconsin. He also directed the Office of the Inspector General to conduct aninvestigation.The missing and now recovered child, Courtney Clark, was under the jurisdictionof the Sixth Judicial Circuit and was being served by the Sarasota Family YMCA.The Sarasota Family YMCA was conducting business as the Safe ChildrenCoalition, the community-based care provider in Pinellas County, Florida.This report of initial findings from the Office of Quality Management focuses onfactual data as currently known through the review process.Additional critical information is still under investigation by the Office of theInspector General and will be addressed in an independent report at a later date.Quality Management OverviewThe Department of Children and Families Office of Quality Management isresponsible for the ongoing review and assessment of the work being conductedwithin the state’s child welfare system. Quality Assurance staff, within the Office ofQuality Management and posted throughout the state, monitor the quality ofservices provided to children and families. They are charged with determiningcompliance with Florida Statutes and federal requirements for the delivery of childwelfare services. Quality Assurance Review Specialists are highly experienced,subject-matter-experts in child welfare case practice.Quality Assurance functions include assessing local care systems, detectingtrends for performance management, and conducting reviews of individual casesto determine the quality of the services provided either by the Department or itscontracted providers. The information collected from these reviews helps ensurethe Department and its contracted providers work in the best interest of children.Child Protection SystemThe Florida Department of Children and Families is responsible for investigatingallegations of abuse, neglect or abandonment. Through Florida’s Abuse Hotline,the Department receives reports of abuse allegations. Those reports are assigned

to trained investigators responsible for investigating the allegations, visiting thechild and the parents or caretakers, and determining if services or some type ofcourt action is needed to make certain that a child is safe.Child abuse investigations are conducted by professionals hired and trained by theDepartment or by Sheriff’s offices. The Department performs these duties in sixtyonecounties and in the remaining six, Pinellas, Pasco, Manatee, Hillsborough,Broward, and Seminole counties, local law enforcement performs this function.When a child is removed from his or her home or the court determines protectiveservices should be provided in the home, those services are provided bycommunity-based care lead agencies under contract with the Department.There are 20 community-based care lead agencies in the State of Florida, eachwith responsibility for foster care and related services in a given geographic area.The cornerstone of lead agency services is case management, which entailssupervision of children and families under the jurisdiction of the Department ofChildren and Families. Lead agencies may provide case management servicesdirectly or may subcontract with another provider for this service.The Sarasota Family YMCA, Inc., is a not-for-profit, community-based care leadagency whose geographic area includes Pinellas County. Case management forchildren 0 – 5 years of age in Pinellas County is subcontracted to Directions forMental Health, Inc., a community mental health service provider. Regardless ofwhether the lead agency provides or subcontracts for case management services,the lead agency remains accountable for compliance with all terms and conditionsof its contract with the Department.Placement of ChildrenFlorida law provides for several options to consider when removing children fromthe care of their parents and placing them outside the home. The court mustapprove all placement decisions for these children, and it is the Department’sresponsibility to keep the court informed of any changes that may occur.Placement options include:Emergency Shelter – a judge reviews initial evidence and decides if a childcan be safely returned to parents. If a return to parents is not possible, thejudge will order that the child be placed in emergency shelter status in thetemporary custody of the state. The child can physically be placed either ina licensed foster care home or with approved relatives or non-relativeswhile in the custody of the state. Emergency shelter status of a child couldonly extend for several weeks while actions are taken to solve the problemsthat caused the removal. If the child cannot be safely returned home, thejudge can keep the child in the custody of the state in licensed foster care,or place the child in the custody of relatives or non-relatives.2

Relative Care – A judge can place children in the custody of relatives, suchas aunts, uncles or grandparents. Prior to this placement, relatives mustundergo a Home Study that includes criminal records checks and athorough assessment of the type of home they are able to offer a child.Placement with relatives is the preferred option for children when theycannot remain with their parents.Licensed Foster Care – If relative care is not appropriate, a judge canhave a child remain in the custody of the state in a licensed foster carehome. Licensed foster parents must also go through a Home Study andrecords checks. In addition, foster parents must successfully completeextensive training courses on caring for a very diverse variety of childrenwho may be placed with them. Licensed foster homes also undergothorough inspections at regular intervals and must meet strict regulations onhome environments that are not required of relative and non-relativeplacements.Non-Relative Care – As an alternative to relative care or licensed fostercare, a judge can place children in the custody of family friends, referred toas “non-relatives.” As in placement with extended family members, nonrelativesmust go through a Home Study that includes criminal recordschecks and a thorough assessment of the type of home they are able tooffer a child.Of the children in out-of-home care in Florida, about 49 percent are in licensedfoster care, about 43 percent are in approved relative placements and theremaining 8 percent are in approved non-relative placements.Two documents filed with the court enable judges to make informed decisionsabout placing children and determining safety of children:Case Plans – Written agreements between parents and social servicesagencies are developed outlining what parents need to do in order toensure the safety of their children. Case plans are developed both whenchildren remain with parents under supervision of case workers, and whenchildren are removed from parents and placed with relatives, non-relativesor in licensed foster care homes. Case plans inform parents of what isexpected of them and the support they will receive to achieve their goals.Home Studies – Before a judge can place a child in the custody of arelative or non-relative, social services must carefully assess thebackground of potential caregivers. Home studies include local, state andnational criminal records checks as well as Abuse Hotline checks. Homestudies must be provided to judges for their review and approval forplacement of a child. Home studies include details about the physicalenvironment of a home, financial information, interviews regarding the3

ability to ensure that a child’s medical, mental, educational and daily lifeneeds can be met and a description of the type of support available fromthe state.Statutory and Regulatory AuthorityChapter 39, Florida Statutes, Proceedings Related to Children, is Florida’s childprotection law. This chapter provides for the care, safety and protection ofchildren.Florida Administrative Code provides the administrative rules used by governmentagencies to carry out the laws enacted by the Legislature. Rules are theframework within which the child protection programs operate.The rules in Chapter 65C of Florida Administrative Code relevant to this case arelisted below:Chapter 65C-28, Out-of-Home Care – The Out-of-Home Care ruleprovides guidance for implementing the provisions of Florida statutes thatrelate to children residing in out-of-home care.Chapter 65C-29, Protective Investigations – The rule on Child ProtectiveInvestigations provides direction in implementing Florida’s statutoryrequirements for the centralized abuse hotline and child protectiveinvestigations functions.Chapter 65C-30, General Child Welfare Provisions – The General ChildWelfare Provisions rule provides a description of services, interventions,and case conduct expectations unique to the child protection system. Itexplains the scope of responsibilities attached to various child protectionprofessionals at critical stages in a case.The Department develops operating procedures to provide further guidelines onhow to put the laws and rules into practice. Operating procedures delineate therequirements, responsibilities, and steps to follow. The contracts between theDepartment and community-based care lead agencies require that lead agenciescomply with Department operating procedures or develop their own operatingprocedures approved by the Department.Computer Systems ReferencedThis report makes reference to several automated systems. The followingsummary is provided to assist the reader who may not be familiar with thesesystems.4

HomeSafenet: This is a statewide computer system that includesinformation on all allegations of abuse or neglect as well as information onthe outcomes of investigations and information regarding children in thechild welfare system. State regulations require that information regardingall contacts or attempted contacts be documented in the case file within twoworking days. HomeSafenet is considered the primary case file record foreach investigation and case.Missing Child Tracking System: The Department’s internal missing childreporting system used by community-based care providers and theDepartment to document events related to children believed to be missingfrom the care and supervision of the state. The Missing Child TrackingSystem is linked to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement databaseand is updated daily.Florida Crime Information Center/ National Crime Information Center:A law enforcement information database containing information collected bycriminal justice agencies used to perform legally authorized, requiredfunctions. All missing child reports generated by local law enforcement arerequired to be entered into the database by the agency that took the report.Other Organizations ReferencedFlorida Department of Law Enforcement/Missing Children InformationClearinghouse: The Missing Children Information Clearinghouse islocated within the Florida Department of Law Enforcement Division ofCriminal Justice Information Services and is a central repository ofinformation regarding missing children. The information is collected anddisseminated to assist law enforcement agencies, public and privateorganizations and the citizens of Florida in locating missing children. TheMissing Children Information Clearinghouse is utilized as a resource centerand information exchange service, and complements the state and federalcomputerized missing persons files.National Center for Missing and Exploited Children: The NationalCenter for Missing and Exploited Children’s mission is to help prevent childabduction and sexual exploitation; help find missing children; and assistvictims of child abduction and sexual exploitation, their families, and theprofessionals who serve them.5

MethodologyA Quality Assurance review was conducted from June 18, 2007, through June 25,2007, by headquarters Quality Assurance staff.The scope of this review included review of prior child protective investigationsconducted by the Department and Seminole and Pinellas County Sheriff’s Offices;HomeSafenet chronological case recordings; and the open case managementservices record provided by the Sarasota Family YMCA.In addition, Quality Assurance reviewers accompanied investigators from theOffice of the Inspector General during two interviews with staff. The results ofinterviews conducted by the Inspector General will be contained in their report.Brief BackgroundThe following is a listing of the organizations involved in providing protectiveservices to Courtney Clark from February 2006 to present.Department of Children and FamiliesTallahasseeDepartment of Children and FamiliesSunCoast RegionSarasota Family YMCASafe Children CoalitionDirections for Mental HealthPinellas CountyLake County Sheriff’s OfficePinellas County Sheriff’s OfficeResponsible for child welfare servicesin the state of FloridaResponsible for child welfare servicesin DeSoto, Hillsborough, Manatee,Pasco, Pinellas and Sarasota counties.Performs protective investigations forDeSoto and Sarasota countiesCommunity-based care lead agencyproviding child welfare services forPinellas, Pasco, DeSoto, Manatee andSarasota counties under contract withthe Department of Children andFamiliesSub-contracted provider of theSarasota Family YMCA, responsible forproviding case management servicesLocal law enforcement entity of LakeCounty, FloridaLocal law enforcement entity; alsoperforms protective investigationsfunction in Pinellas County6

Seminole County Sheriff’s OfficeLocal law enforcement entity; alsoperforms protective investigationsfunction in Seminole CountyThe Sarasota Family YMCA in Pinellas County began providing services toCandice Farris, aka Candice Clark, and her child, Courtney, in February 2006.Courtney was removed from her mother because Ms. Farris was incarcerated foridentify theft and the child had been found living in hazardous conditions. Duringthis separation a second child was born to Ms. Farris. Courtney was reunified withher mother, who was reportedly working on several activities required in her caseplan. Ms. Farris and her daughters moved to Seminole County where Ms. Farriswas arrested on a larceny charge. Case documentation indicates Ms. Farris askedthat her children be placed with family friends, Cynthia and Mark Martell, in LakeCounty.On September 23, 2006, Ms. Farris abducted Courtney and also took her youngersibling after reportedly telling the Martells that she had completed the activities inher case plan. The family’s whereabouts remained unknown until June 14, 2007,when the children were recovered in Portage, Wisconsin. The situation in theWisconsin home presented a dangerous environment for the children; thereforethe State of Wisconsin has assumed protective custody of the children. At thistime, it is not in Courtney’s best interest to experience another change inplacement. Therefore, a Motion to Transfer Jurisdiction to Wisconsin has beenfiled in Pinellas County.Focus of Quality AssuranceThe Quality Assurance review of this case revealed five areas with significantfindings in how this family’s case was managed. Key finding areas include:I. Reporting a Missing ChildII. ReunificationIII. Assessment of New Child Born Into an Active CaseIV. Home StudyV. Courtesy Supervision7

FindingsI. Reporting a Missing ChildIssue: There was a four-month gap from the time Courtney was taken fromher court-ordered placement to notifying appropriate local law enforcementauthorities for entry into the Florida Crime Information Center/ National CrimeInformation Center database.Requirement: Administrative rule and state and local operating proceduresrequire that any child that is believed to be missing from a placement should beimmediately reported to local law enforcement so that the case can be enteredby local law enforcement in the Florida Crime Information Center/ NationalCrime Information Center and the case can be forwarded and opened byFlorida Department of Law Enforcement Missing Children InformationClearinghouse.Chapter 65C-30.019, Florida Administrative Code, Department OperatingProcedure 175-85, and Sarasota Family YMCA Policy Number 100.009provide the specific authority and direction related to missing children. Theprocedures require that as soon as it is determined that a child is missing, staffwill begin making appropriate contacts in an effort to locate the child. Theprocedure for reporting missing children is attached.Findings: Case documentation indicates that the Martells were informed viaphone conversations with Judith McInerney, case manager for Directions forMental Health, of the restrictions on releasing Courtney, and copied on theOrder to Modify Custody issued by Judge Fleming dated August 23, 2006. Theorder clearly instructs the Martells to notify local law enforcement and theDepartment immediately if at any time the child is determined to be missing orif Courtney’s whereabouts become unknown. On September 23, 2006, Ms.Martell violated the court order and allowed Courtney to leave with her mother.Case notes document that Ms. Martell did not tell her assigned case manager,Carmen Caballero with Directions for Mental Health, a sub-contracted providerfor the Sarasota Family YMCA, what happened until October 4, 2006. Casenotes indicate that Ms. Martell said “she made a big mistake” by returningCourtney to her mother.According to documentation, Ms. Caballero did not instruct Ms. Martell tocontact local law enforcement in accordance with requirements noted above,nor did Ms. Caballero notify local law enforcement officials within a timelymanner as required in “all cases of missing children whose location is notdetermined” in accordance with the regulations in the Sarasota Family YMCA’spolicy, the Department’s operating procedure and Florida Administrative Rule.8

The only notification made on October 4, 2006, was to the Assistant StateAttorney responsible for child welfare legal services in Pinellas County in orderto request a pick-up order as Ms. Caballero thought that the mother and childmight be in Colorado to appear at a scheduled court hearing.The chronological notes documenting the October 4, 2006, telephone call fromMs. Martell to Ms. Caballero was entered into HomeSafenet on October 16,2006. Administrative rules require such entry within two business days.Documentation indicates a series of e-mails were exchanged between theDepartment of Children and Families’ SunCoast Region and the SarasotaFamily YMCA pertaining to Courtney. The SunCoast Region’s Family SafetyProgram Specialist, Kathleen Matthews, contacted the Sarasota Family YMCAapproximately nine times through e-mail from October 6 to December 28, 2006(see Appendix 4). Included in the e-mails were alerts that Courtney had notbeen seen by her case manager as required and requests for status updateson her case. Documentation does not reflect that Ms. Matthews’ e-mailsprompted the Sarasota Family YMCA to take appropriate action, nor does itreflect any actions were taken to comply with existing missing child policies asrequired. In addition, despite inclusion of administrators/managers from theSunCoast Region and the Sarasota Family YMCA in the distribution of e-mailcorrespondence, interventions were not taken by leadership to ensurecompliance with the policy.Despite prompts from the SunCoast Region to the Sarasota Family YMCA,along with numerous HomeSafenet entries pertaining to Courtney’s status asmissing, the issue was not acted on by senior leaders at Sarasota FamilyYMCA or senior managers in the Department. Prompt, effective action toreport the child as missing was not taken by either organization.Major steps of the missing child protocol were not followed that includedimmediate reporting to local law enforcement that Courtney was missing,notification within four hours by the case manager once she knew Courtneywas missing, and completion of the required Missing Child Reporting Form bythe case manager within one day.The Missing Child Reporting Form was not completed until December 29,2006. The Sarasota Family YMCA Operating Procedure 100.009 requiresreporting incidents within one working day upon learning that a child is missing.As part of the Sarasota Family YMCA’s internal quality management plan,Courtney’s case was included in a sample pool of cases reviewed by TrishAdams, Missing Child Point of Contact for the Sarasota Family YMCA. Adamsreviewed Courtney’s case on January 2, 2007, and noted deficiencies forgeneral case practice requirements involving safety, placement stability,9

eunification, case manager visitation, and case worker supervision. Also, Ms.Adams indicated that procedures were not followed pertaining to an abductedand missing child. Despite identifying these child safety concerns, their reviewdid not result in any documented action on the part of the Sarasota FamilyYMCA.Local law enforcement officials were not contacted for the purposes of issuinga missing child report until January 19, 2007, nearly four months after the childwas known to be missing.A review of the Department’s Missing Child Tracking System indicates that theDirections for Mental Health case manager, Carmen Caballero, wasknowledgeable about the notification process for missing children. She hadpreviously entered a total of ten missing child episodes prior to this report, ofwhich nine had been reported to local law enforcement in a timely manner, andall but two had been entered in the Missing Child Tracking System withinapproximately one working day of learning of the event.When the missing child report was made with the local law enforcementagency in Lake County, there was a delay in the case being entered into theFlorida Crime Information Center/National Crime Information Center by locallaw enforcement. After some collaboration between the SunCoast Region,Sarasota Family YMCA and the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, thechild was finally listed in the appropriate databases on February 18, 2007.Recommendations: Immediate action is recommended to:Establish a zero tolerance policy for failure to follow procedures related toreporting and locating missing children.Begin local review of cases where in-state children have not been seen bya caseworker for 55 days or more, and if a child is missing, immediatelyreport that child to local law enforcement. Technical assistance andoperational support shall be provided by region and headquarters staff.The goal is to reduce the review time period for children not seen by acaseworker to 31 days. Currently, caseworkers are required to see childrenin care every 30 days.Further explore technology options to verify the whereabouts of children inthe state’s care.Direct the Department’s General Counsel to review standard communitybasedcare contract language to make sure that all statutory and regulatoryrequirements are included.10

II. ReunificationIssue: A reunification staffing (a meeting to consider progress towardreunifying Ms. Farris with her daughter) was held on March 6, 2006, with MsFarris and Judith McInerney, Directions for Mental Health case manager, aswell as Anita Sylvia, Supervisor, and Tanya Liebau, Assistant Director ofOperations both with the Sarasota Family YMCA. The recommendation of thestaffing team to reunify was not fully in accord with the Sarasota FamilyYMCA’s policy 100.018 or the Department’s procedure (CFOP 175-38), asdescribed below.Requirement: Administrative Rule, state and local operating proceduresdefine requirements in the reunification process. These include Chapters 65C-28.006, 65C-30.008, 65C-30.013, and 65C30.014 of Florida AdministrativeCode, Departmental Operation Procedure 175-38, and Sarasota Family YMCAPolicy Number 100.018.Findings: Courtney was removed from her mother on February 21, 2006, andplaced in licensed foster care in Pinellas County. The placement becamenecessary when the mother was arrested for identity theft and the child wasfound living in hazardous conditions. From the period of February 21, 2006through April 13, 2006, Courtney resided in four separate licensed fosterhomes. Courtney was reunified with her mother on April 13, 2006.The Sarasota Family YMCA developed a case plan with Ms. Farris, approvedby the court, which included several tasks to be completed while she wasunder court-ordered protective supervision. The case plan required Ms. Farristo: participate in a psycho-social assessment, complete a parenting program,enroll Courtney in Healthy Start, maintain contact with Sarasota Family YMCAcase manager, have no further law violations, and secure stable housing andfinancial stability.Ms. Farris completed a psycho-social assessment and was maintaining contactwith the Sarasota Family YMCA. The tasks of no new law violations, stableincome, stable housing, participating in Healthy Start and completing aparenting program were tasks listed as “in progress.” However, the staffingteam determined Ms. Farris was in “substantial compliance” with her case plan.There is minimal documentation to support Ms. Farris’ compliance with tasks.Case notes do not reflect the rationale for considering Ms. Farris in “substantialcompliance,” nor is there documentation from other service agencies toindicate Ms. Farris’ participation in completing tasks.In addition, no documentation was found that a risk assessment had beencompleted prior to reunification as required by local and state protocol. Nor11

was documentation found that child care arrangements had been arrangedprior to reunification as required by local protocol.The safety plan, agreed to upon reunification, specified the case managerwould conduct weekly visits for four weeks and risk was then to be “reassessed.”Weekly visits occurred for the first four weeks, however, there is nodocumentation of a risk assessment or supervisory conference occurring.One month after reunification, as required in her case plan, Ms. Farris statedCourtney was enrolled in daycare three times a week. No documentation wasfound to indicate the case manager verified through visits or contacts that thechild was in attendance.Recommendations: Review local operating procedures to ensure guidelinesare in place to reflect the following:• Document key decision-making steps leading up to reunification, includingsupervisory and legal review and approval.• Document the determination of substantial compliance with case plans.• Meet all post-reunification supervision requirements.III. Assessment of New Child Born Into an Active CaseIssue: Ms. Farris delivered a child on March 25, 2006, while there was anactive dependency case involving her and Courtney. The newborn remained inher mother's custody. There is no documentation to indicate the SarasotaFamily YMCA followed its own protocol as provided in Policy 100.045,“Children Born into Active Cases.”Requirement: Administrative Rule, state and local operating proceduresdefine requirements for adding new children into an active case. These includeChapter 65C-30.016, Florida Administrative Code, Departmental OperatingProcedure 175-72, and Sarasota Family YMCA Policy 100.045. Theseprocedures require the case manager to immediately report to the supervisor: apending birth, a child born into a family, or any other circumstance involving anew child who is living in the home where all other children are currently in outof-homecare or under in-home protective supervision or post-placementsupervision. Additionally, the case manager must visit the home and conductan assessment to determine the safety of the child in the home.Findings: The case record contains no documentation as to how SarasotaFamily YMCA case management staff reached the decision to leave thenewborn child in Ms. Farris’ custody without either court-ordered or voluntary12

services in place. Given the recent removal and reunification, a newborn childincreased the risks to family stability.There is no documentation to indicate that a staffing was held by SarasotaFamily YMCA with supervisors or legal services to assess the impact of a newchild born into the family. The newborn was not entered into any automatedtracking system such as HomeSafenet or the Sarasota Family YMCA’sdatabase as per their Policy 100.045, “Children Born into Active Cases.”Contrary to a reported mechanism used by Sarasota Family YMCA of tracking“other children,” i.e., children who are not included in the dependency process,there is no documentation to support the newborn was “tracked.” Anotheropportunity was missed to add the newborn to the dependency process whenplacement became necessary again on July 22, 2006.Recommendation: Direct appropriate legal staff to review all local operatingprocedures regarding active cases that involve additional children subsequentto the original pleadings for conformance with law and rule.IV. Home StudyIssue: A Home Study, completed by the Seminole County Sheriff’s OfficeChild Protective Investigator, Traci Gritter, does not fully disclose the nature ofthe non-relative caregivers’ abuse history, nor does it provide enoughdescriptive detail for the Sarasota Family YMCA and/or the court to make aninformed decision for placement.Requirement: Administrative Rule, state and local operating proceduresdefine requirements for conducting home studies and background recordchecks. These include Chapters 65C-28.004, 65C-28.011, 65C-28.012, 65C-29.009, and 65C-30.011, Florida Administrative Code.Findings: As a result of Ms. Farris’ arrest on a larceny charge July 22, 2006,during which there was an open investigation alleging “environmental hazards,”Courtney and her sister went to stay with family friends, Cynthia and MarkMartell who reportedly had known the family for some time.On July 26, 2006, Tracy Gritter, Child Protective Investigator with the SeminoleCounty Sheriff’s Office learned Ms. Farris had been extradited to Colorado andthat the children would remain with the Martells longer than anticipated.On July 27, 2006, Judith McInerney, the Directions for Mental Health casemanager, informed Ms. Gritter that Pinellas County had an open case onCourtney and that she needed a completed Home Study on the Martell’sresidence in Lake County in order to do a modification of placement from Ms.Farris to the non-relative. Traci Gritter completed the Home Study on the13

Martell home in Lake County on July 27, 2006, and it was approved by KellyRoberts, Seminole County Sheriff’s Office supervisor.The Home Study indicates Mark and Cynthia Martell were both caregivers inthe home. Ms. Martell stated she had known “Candice Clark” (alias of Ms.Farris) for a year and saw the family on a daily basis.The approved Home Study references an Abuse Hotline abuse report receivedon November 7, 2003, which was closed with “some indicators” of abuse andneglect. This report contained allegations of sexual battery, sexual molestationand mental injury. This report was closed with “some indicators” of sexualbattery-abuse, sexual molestation-abuse, and mental injury-threatened harm.The Investigative Decision Summary indicates that local law enforcement wasnotified.The approved Home Study also references another Abuse Hotline abusereport from 1995 alleging sexual molestation in the home. The case wasclosed by the Department with no indicators of abuse. However, there wasinformation in the allegation that was potentially relevant to the Home Study.Specific information regarding these allegations needed to be addressed in theHome Study which would have allowed the Sarasota Family YMCA and thepresiding judge to more accurately assess whether this was an appropriateplacement for the children.Recommendation: Direct the Office of Family Safety to convene a workgroupto review current Home Study requirements and propose remedies to lack ofclarification for informed decision-making. The workgroup shall considerlegislative language for changes to our child protection laws that will clarifylimitations for judicial approval of non-relative care placements of children.V. Courtesy SupervisionIssue: There is no documentation Sarasota Family YMCA initiated a requestfor courtesy supervision in accordance with their Policy 100.007, “CourtesySupervision,” which states that “case managers requesting services in anotherlocale will follow the Department of Children and Families Operating Procedure175-43.”Requirement: Administrative rule, state and local operating procedures definerequirements for courtesy supervision. These include Chapters 65C-30.007,65C-30.008, 65C-30.011, 65C-30.018, Florida Administrative Code,Departmental Operation Procedure 175-43, and Sarasota Family YMCA Policy700.007.14

Findings: Courtney Clark entered the state dependency system in PinellasCounty and was under court-ordered supervision. Courtesy supervision of herwell-being should have been requested if she moved to another county.There is no documentation that reflects courtesy supervision was requestedwhen Ms. Farris first moved Courtney to Seminole County, nor was anydocumentation found to indicate courtesy supervision was requested when thechild was placed with the Martells in Lake County, even after a Modification ofPlacement was approved by the court.Judith McInerney, Directions for Mental Health case manager, requested LakeCounty Department of Children and Families’ Child Protective Investigations doa wellness check on Courtney in the Martell home. The wellness check wasconducted on August 30, 2006. This was the only time she was seen in thatplacement prior to her abduction by Ms. Farris.Recommendations: Direct Regional Directors to convene a meeting withDepartment of Children and Families Circuit Administrators, Sheriff’s Officesand lead agencies to review the execution of statewide working agreement fortransfer and acceptance of Courtesy Supervision cases, and determine if localprocesses conform to administrative rule requirements.Continue the ongoing work to execute the statewide working agreementaccording to Chapter 65C-30.018, Florida Administrative Code.Direct the Family Safety Program Office to develop training materials availablethrough the Center for the Advancement of Child Welfare Practice.Additional Recommended ActionsRequire the Sarasota Family YMCA to develop a corrective action plan to addressall issues cited in the findings of this report as well as the findings andrecommendations of the pending Inspector General's report.15

Appendices1. Child Location Process2. Listing of Professionals3. Relative Care, Non-Relative Care, Licensed Care Matrix4. Detailed Time Line16

Appendix 1Child Location ProcessDepartment Operating Procedure 175-85Tasks in Bold are Required by Chapter 65C-30.019, Florida Administrative Code1. The case manager or caregiver determines that a child is missing, i.e., thechild’s whereabouts are unknown.2. The case manager or caregiver determines under what conditions the childwent missing and if immediate notification to local law enforcement is required.• Immediate notification to local law enforcement is required when a child’swhereabouts are unknown and the child is under the age of thirteen,believed to be in an unsafe situation for their age and development, in a lifethreatening situation, in the company of others who could endanger theirwelfare.• Notification to local law enforcement is required within four hours in allcases of missing children whose location is undetermined.3. The case manager, the caregiver or community-based care ChildLocation Point of Contact reports the child as missing to local lawenforcement and requests a police report number.• If local law enforcement will not generate a missing child report, the casemanager or the community-based care Child Location Point of Contactattempts to clarify the reason(s) why the report was not taken and addressthem in an effort to encourage local law enforcement to generate themissing child report.• Available resources to assist the case manager and the community-basedcare Child Location Point of Contact are: the Watch Commander of thelocal law enforcement agency not accepting the report; the communitybasedcare Child Location Point of Contact; the District/RegionDepartment’s Child Location Point of Contact; the Department’s ChildLocation Unit/Tallahassee, the Florida Department of Law EnforcementMissing Children Information Clearinghouse.4. Local Law enforcement enters the missing child report into the Florida CrimeInformation Center/National Crime Information Center databases.• Florida Crime Information Center/National Crime Information Centeridentifies the child as missing to all law enforcement agencies in Florida andthroughout the country.17

5. A missing child report is entered into the Department’s Missing ChildTracking System• The entry of a missing child report in the Missing Child Tracking Systemallows for an alert to be activated in HomeSafenet and for the missing childcase to be opened with the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.Note: At this point:• Notification that a child is believed to be missing has been provided to theDepartment, local law enforcement, and to the Florida Department of LawEnforcement’s Missing Children Information Clearinghouse. In addition,there is an active missing child report in Florida Crime InformationCenter/National Crime Information Center available to all law enforcementagencies throughout the country.• Local law enforcement has an open case on their investigative case loadand a Florida Department of Law Enforcement Missing Child Analyst hasbeen assigned the case.6. As soon as possible, the case manager shall notify the court that thechild has been reported as missing.7. In addition to the efforts of local law enforcement and the FloridaDepartment of Law Enforcement to locate the child, the case manager willattempt to locate the child at least once per week for the first threemonths, then monthly thereafter until the child is located.18

Appendix 2Listing of ProfessionalsName Title/Role AgencyTrish Adams Quality Management ComplianceSpecialist/Missing Child Point of ContactSarasota Family YMCA/ SafeChildrens' CoalitionCarmen Case ManagerDirections for Mental HealthCaballeroCindy Ennis Assistant State Attorney Pinellas County StateAttorney's OfficeMarion Circuit Court JudgeSixth Judicial CircuitFlemingTraci Gritter Child Protective Investigator Seminole County Sheriff'sOfficeLee Johnson Executive Vice-President Sarasota Family YMCAChristy Kane Senior Vice-President of Community- Sarasota Family YMCABased Care OperationsMelanieLaurellaMissing Children's InformationClearinghouse AnalystFlorida Department of LawEnforcementTanya Liebau Assistant Director of Operations Safe Childrens' CoalitionKathleenMatthewsSunCoast Region Family Safety ProgramSpecialistDepartment of Children andFamiliesJudith Case ManagerDirections for Mental HealthMcInerneyMelissa Remy Missing Children's InformationClearinghouse AnalystFlorida Department of LawEnforcementKelly Roberts Child Protective Investigator Supervisor Seminole County Sheriff'sOfficeBarbara Senior Director of Community-Based Care Sarasota Family YMCASimmons Data ServicesAnita Sylvia Case Manager Supervisor Directions for Mental HealthJim Vachon Detective Lake County Sheriff's Office19

Appendix 3Relative, Non-Relative and Licensed Care MatrixIssueBackgroundScreeningFor all householdmembers andfrequent visitors tohome, age 12+(city, county,FDLE/FCIC,FAHIS, Out ofState AbuseChecks, ArrestHistory, DJJ (age12-26), NCICname check andFingerprints (age18+).Include injunctions& police call-outsRelativePlacementsNeeded, pursuant to65C-28.011 F.A.C.Best practice.Non-RelativePlacementsNeeded, pursuantto65C-28.011F.A.C.Best practice.LicensedPlacementsNeeded, pursuantto65C-13.022F.A.C.; also, civilcourts recordscheck.Annual rescreeningfor relicensureincludeslocal criminalcheck, FAHIScheck and mayinclude call-outsand 911 calls;FDLE re-checkedevery 5 years.Prior CourtApprovalFor emergencyplacements inexigentcircumstances(placement to bemade within 72hours).Prior CourtApprovalFor nonemergency,nonexigent(planned)placements.Not needed, butresults of allbackground screens(except fingerprints)must be back priorto making theplacement. Courtapproval is thenneeded within 24hours.Needed, and resultsof backgroundscreens (includingfingerprints) must bereviewed prior torecommendingplacement to court.Not needed, butresults of allbackgroundscreens (exceptfingerprints) mustbe back prior tomaking theplacement. Courtapproval is thenneeded within 24hours.Needed, andresults of allbackgroundscreens (includingfingerprints) mustbe reviewed priorto recommendingthe placement tothe court.Not needed.Court approvalwithin 24 hoursafter placement.Not needed, butas soon aspractical aftermaking thedecision tochangeplacements.20

IssueHome StudyIncluding (at aminimum) aninterview with theproposedcaregivers and anassessment oftheir ability to meetthe child’s need forprotection;backgroundscreening (asabove); anassessment of thehome’s physicalenvironment; adetermination ofcaregiver’sfinancial securityand ability toprovide child withlong-termpermanency ifneeded; adetermination ofchildcare needs;counseling on thedependencyprocess, andavailablecommunitysupport, etc.Preservation ofFamily Ties andContinuity inRelationships(ASFA)RelativePlacementsNeeded, pursuant to65C-28.012 F.A.C.,within 30 daysfollowing theplacement (buttypically completedprior to theplacement); also,completed pursuantto 39.521(2)(r) F.S.,and filed with thecourt as part of thePDS within 72 hoursprior to theDisposition Hearing.Second only to noncustodialparent interms of out-ofhomeplacementpriority and leastrestrictive;preserves family tiesand connections;child often knowsthe relative, therebyreducing the traumaof out-of-homeNon-RelativePlacementsNeeded, pursuantto65C-28.012F.A.C., within 30days following theplacement (buttypicallycompleted prior tothe placement);also, completedpursuant to39.521(2)(r) F.S.,and filed with thecourt as part ofthe PDS within 72hours prior to theDispositionHearing.Next placementpriority (and nextin terms of leastrestrictive), rightafter relativeplacement.Non-relative mayhave priorrelationship withchild (andparents), therebyminimizingLicensedPlacementsNeeded, pursuantto65C-13.024(5);same info asothers, plus:health dept.inspection ofhome;employmenthistory andincomeverification;medical history;water safety; workand personalreferences;school referencesfor childrenalready in thehome; familystrengths andneeds;background andmarital history;childhoodexperiences;hobbies;church/groupaffiliations, etc.Home Studyupdated annually.Last placementpriority.21

IssueRemunerationRequiredHomeVisitsw/ChildrenFace-to-facecontacts with thechild in the home,including both predisposition(shelterstatus) and postdispositionvisits.Face to facecontacts shalloccur morefrequently thanevery 30 dayswhen the child’ssituation dictatesmore frequentcontact, perdetermination bythe Supervisor orthe court (per 65C-30.007 F.A.C.).Service ReferralsMade by CPIs andCaseworkers toensure all needs ofchild and caregiverare met.RelativePlacementsplacement; child’svisitation/contactwith parent may bemore easilyhandled.Pursuant to39.5085, F.S., canreceive RelativeCaregiver funds(monthly) if eligible.While in shelterstatus, once every 7days for the first 30days after removal,then may bemodified to no lessfrequently than onceevery 30 days untildisposition; no lessfrequently thanevery 30 daysthereafter.Once every 3months, the homevisit is to beunannounced.Non-RelativePlacementstraumatic effect ofout-of-homeplacement. Childsometimes“chooses” nonrelative(favoriteteacher, friend’sparent, etc.).Non-relativereceives nomonetary benefit.While in shelterstatus, onceevery 7 days forthe first 30 daysafter removal,then may bemodified to noless frequentlythan once every30 days untildisposition; noless frequentlythan every 30days thereafter.Once every 3months, the homevisit is to beunannounced.LicensedPlacementsReceives fostercare boardpayments(monthly).While in shelterstatus, once every7 days untildisposition, andthen no lessfrequently thanonce every 30days thereafter.Once every 3months, the homevisit is to beunannounced.Made as needed. Made as needed. Made as needed.22

IssueTrainingPre-Service/In-ServiceRelativePlacementsNon-RelativePlacementsLicensedPlacementsNone required. None required. MAPP (30-hour)Pre-Servicetraining isrequired as acondition oflicensure; 8 hoursof annual inservicetraining isrequired for relicensure(per65C-13.025F.A.C).23

Appendix 4Detailed Time LineCandice Farris aka Clark aka Sisk02/21/2006 – Abuse report is received. Investigated by Pinellas County Sheriffchild protective investigator. Courtney Clark is sheltered as a result of verifiedfindings of “parent incarcerated” and some indications of environmental hazards.”03/25/2006 – Ms. Farris gives birth to daughter—sister of Courtney. Child was notadded to court petition and remained in the custody of Ms. Farris even thoughCourtney Clark was currently placed in out-of-home care.03/29/2006 – Abuse report is received. Allegations that Courtney Clark was beingabused by her foster parent while in care. Report is closed with no indicators ofphysical abuse to Courtney Clark while she is in foster care.04/04/2006 – Chronological notes indicate a Home Study was completed on Ms.Farris for the purposes of reunification with Courtney.04/07/2006 – Reunification case staffing held. Recommendations includeunsupervised visits for Ms. Farris with Courtney. Case manager is required to visithome once per week for the first four weeks.04/13/2006 – Motion to reunify Courtney with Ms. Farris is filed by case manager.Motion granted by the court and Courtney returned to Ms Farris’ care.04/22/2006 – Home visit completed. HomeSafenet notes indicate home was“hazard free” and that Courtney’s ear infection and cold are “gone.” She has arash on her buttocks.04/28/2006 – Complaint filed with case manager alleging Ms. Farris is drivingwithout placing the children in a car seat; the infant has a dirty diaper; and Ms.Farris is stealing complainant’s identity. Home visit completed same day by casemanager. Courtney Clark is observed to have a scratch on the left side of her faceand a bruise under her eye. Ms. Farris reports incident happened at Chuck E.Cheese when Courtney got into a fight with another child. Ms. Farris states she istaking child to doctor at 11 a.m. this date. Ms. Farris also reports to case managerthat the child’s rash is getting better.05/05/2006 – Home visit by case manager. Unidentified person is also in homewith Ms. Farris, Courtney Clark, and Courtney’s sister. Courtney is observed tohave pink eye. Ms. Farris stated she has medication for the child. Ms. Farrisstated she is on waiting list for day care. Courtney’s sister is observed to have ascratch to her eyelid and Ms. Farris stated that Courtney inflicted the scratch.24

05/12/2006 – Home visit by case manager. Ms. Farris’ unidentified friend remainsin home. There is no documentation that background check was completed on thefriend. Case notes reflect that Ms. Farris states her father is ill and that she needsto go to Kentucky from 05/16/2006 to 05/26/2006 with Courtney. Ms. Farrisreports Courtney’s rash is healed and that child is attending day care three timesper week.05/26/2006 – Due to inconsistencies in the conditions regarding the maternalgrandfather’s demise, case manager staffed case with Assistant State Attorney(Child Welfare Legal Services) who reports Ms. Farris is to verify reason for trip,provide information from the funeral home, or provide information for an individualwith whom the child could be sheltered while Ms. Farris is traveling.05/27/2006 – Home visit by case manager. Courtney’s sister is present along withMs. Farris’ friend who appeared to be caring for the baby while mother was out ofstate. Ms. Farris reports Courtney Clark “ate several cigarettes and threw up.”She also states that Courtney gags herself after eating. Case manager alsodocumented that home was messy and that baby (sister) smelled of vomit. Ms.Farris stated that Courtney’s sister had a “stomach bug.” When asked by casemanager for paperwork regarding the funeral, mother states she does not have it,the maternal grandmother does and she will produce for case manager at a latertime. Ms. Farris states she needs to return to Kentucky on 05/29/2006 and05/30/2006.06/02/2006 – Case manager checks with parenting class provider to confirm Ms.Farris’ attendance as required in her case plan. Provider states that Ms. Farris hasnever contacted them to initiate the program.06/06/2006 – Initial Judicial Review Hearing held. Ms. Farris was found to bepartially compliant with the tasks in her case plan. Ms. Farris reports duringhearing that Courtney Clark has a staph infection in her foot and she was going totake Courtney to the emergency room.06/29/2006 – HomeSafenet note indicates that Ms. Farris has moved to SeminoleCounty. Courtney Clark was seen in the office with Ms. Farris. Ms. Farris reportsthat Courtney was recently seen at Seminole County General Care and is notcurrently enrolled in day care. Courtney was observed to have a scratch on theright side of her face. Ms. Farris states it was a scar “that she always had.”Courtney also had a cut on her forehead which was reportedly from the“Grandpa’s tooth.”07/21/2006 – Abuse report received. Investigated by Seminole County Sheriff’schild protective investigator. Allegations are: conditions hazardous to a child; dirtyhome and allegations related to another family/child in the home. Candice Farris,Courtney Clark and her sister are reported to be living in the home.25

07/22/2006 – Supplemental abuse report received alleging environmental hazards.Candice Farris was arrested for unknown reasons. Courtney and her sister’swhereabouts are unknown. Reporter later called back and provided informationthat Ms. Farris had been arrested for grand theft. Children are currently with afriend (believed to be Cynthia Martell, also spelled Martel.)Child protective investigator from Seminole County Sheriff’s Office contactedCynthia Martell via phone and obtained demographic information. Ms. Martellresides in Lake County. Ms. Martell reported she could take care of Courtney andCourtney’s sister while Ms. Farris was in jail. Seminole child protectiveinvestigator obtained background checks and approved Ms. Martell to care for thechildren.07/26/2006 – Case manager receives telephone call from Cynthia Martell (currentnon-relative caregiver) who reports she had cared for the children while motherwas out of state. Ms. Farris did not attend her father’s funeral in Kentucky,however, she did go to North Carolina with her paramour, Michael Sisk. Ms. Farrisalso forged a letter of compliance from Healthy Start and had forwarded to thecase manager.07/27/2006 – Abuse report received. Allegation: “There were concerns that thechild, Courtney (DOB 12/18/2004) may have been sexually abused while in thecare of her mother, Candice Farris, due to the number of men that the mother wasinvolved with.” At the time of this report Courtney was found living in SeminoleCounty in the home of the daughter of Cynthia Martell. Ms. Martell resided inSorrento and the reason for the report being assigned to Lake County. DCF LakeCounty child protective investigator initiated contact to ensure the child victim wasseen within 24 hours. There was also an open report in Seminole County initiatedon 7/21/2006 which alleged conditions hazardous involving Courtney and twoother children in the home. During the contact with Ms. Martell, the DCF childprotective investigator was advised that Seminole County Sheriff child protectiveinvestigator had completed a Home Study on her residence in Lake County.Abuse report was closed on 7/31/2006, with no findings for the maltreatment.08/08/2006 – Motion to modify custody of Courtney Clark to non-relatives, Cynthiaand Mark Martell, filed with Pinellas County Juvenile Court.08/10/2006 – Motion to modify custody of Courtney Clark to non-relatives, Cynthiaand Mark Martell, granted by Pinellas County Juvenile Court.08/14/2006 – Ms. Farris was informed by the case manager that her children arenow in custody of non-relative caregiver. Ms. Farris indicates she will hire aprivate attorney and will get children back. Case manager documents that areunification staffing would be held and Ms. Farris would need to provide proof of26

compliance with case plan tasks in order to regain custody of her children. Ms.Farris was advised of terms of the case plan.08/15/2006 – Staffing held with the Pinellas/Pasco Assistant State Attorney.Psychological assessment to be added to case plan tasks for Ms. Farris. Custodywas changed to non-relative placement and Sarasota Family YMCA was not giventhe discretion to reunify the child.08/15/2006 – Telephone call from a relative who reports being concerned Ms.Farris will abscond with children upon her return to Florida. (Ms. Farris wasincarcerated in Colorado at this time).08/16/2006 – Case manager called to verify that the two doctors that Ms. Farrisstated she had taken the children to had in fact seen the children. One doctor didnot exist and the other had not seen the children.08/30/2006 – Child wellness check completed by Lake County child protectiveinvestigator during a home visit for case manager.08/30/2006 – Abuse report received alleging that Courtney’s sister was noticedwith bruises all over her body, bruises are dark blue in color, and are located onher hands and legs. The report further alleged that “it is unknown what happenedto her, but she has been under the care of her maternal grandmother, Cynthia andCandice, her mother, does not live in the home and is not caring for (Courtney’ssister) because she (Candice) has liver problems and cancer.” Cynthia and MarkMartell were the caretakers for Courtney Clark and her sister at this time. LakeCounty child protective investigator observed the children on 08/30/2006 andnoted no injuries to the children. The Lake County Sheriff’s Department alsoconducted a child wellness check for Pinellas County to ensure Courtney’s safetyon the same day. The police report documented the child (Courtney) was seenand reflected no concerns. There were no visible injuries to the children in thehome.09/07/2006 – Abuse report was closed on 09/07/2006, with no findings of otherphysical injuries-threatened harm.10/04/2006 – Case manager received a call from caregiver, Cynthia Martell,stating that she had “made a big mistake” and allowed Ms. Farris to leave with thechildren, Courtney Clark and her sister on 09/23/2006. Only Courtney Clark hadan open court-ordered case plan at this time. Ms. Martell stated that Ms. Farris toldher that at the court hearing that day, that the case was closed and that Courtneywas to be returned to her. Ms. Martell stated to case manager, that she believedthe mother, therefore did not question her or notify the case manager until10/4/2006 [Entered into HomeSafenet 10/16/2006].27

10/04/2006 – Case manager contacted Assistant State Attorney Cindy Ennis toinform her of the situation. Ms. Ennis stated that she would issue a pick up orderfirst thing in the morning [Entered in HomeSafenet 10/16/2006].10/05/2006 – Case manager obtained pick up order on the child [Entered inHomeSafenet 10/16/2006].10/05/2006 – Case manager contacted Grand Junction Police Department (Ms.Farris was believed to be in Colorado, where she had previous charges) to requestassistance with the pick up order. Case manager spoke to Cindy at dispatch. Shesaid that she would relay message to an officer and have them return casemanager’s call [Entered in HomeSafenet 10/16/2006].10/05/2006 – Case manager received call from an Officer Dixon of the GrandJunction Police Department. He requested that the case manager fax a copy ofthe pick up order. Records check by Officer Dixon indicated that Ms. Farris had acourt appearance scheduled for the next day [Entered in HomeSafenet10/16/2006].10/06/2006 – SunCoast Region Family Safety Program Office Specialist KathleenMatthews forwarded e-mail to Sarasota Family YMCA to advise that CourtneyClark had not been seen in 37 days.10/06/2006 – Case manager faxed copy of pick up order to Officer Dixon. Hewent to the courthouse and called the case manager back stating he had justmissed Ms. Farris as she left the courthouse a few minutes before he arrived. Heoffered to check the home address, if one was available [Entered in HomeSafenet10/16/2006].10/06/2006 – Case manager received call from Joseph Jueschke, Colorado childprotective investigator. He requested that case manager mail a certified copy ofthe pick up order to him in Colorado [Entered in HomeSafenet 10/16/2006].10/11/2006 – Case manager made a copy of the certified pick up order for file andprovided original to office assistant to be mailed overnight [Entered inHomeSafenet 10/16/2006].10/30/2006 – SunCoast Family Safety Program Specialist Kathleen Matthewsforwarded e-mail to Barbara Simmons at the Sarasota Family YMCA stating thatCourtney Clark had not been seen for 61 days. Request is made that SarasotaFamily YMCA update as to the reason Courtney has not been seen. Copied onthe e-mail are Christy Kane and Lee Johnson of the Sarasota Family YMCA andseveral Administrators with the Department of Children and Families SunCoastRegion.28

10/30/2006 – Case manager contacted Officer Dixon of the Grand Junction PoliceDepartment to see if there were any updates as to the whereabouts of Ms. Farrisor Courtney Clark. Officer Dixon stated that they have not been able to track herdown yet and that Ms. Farris failed to appear in court three days ago. A warrantfor her arrest had been issued. Her bond was set at $30,000. Ms. Farris’paramour (Michael Sisk) also had a warrant out for his arrest with a bond of$15,000. The officer stated that they had a few addresses in the case fileincluding one given in court during her last hearing. He stated law enforcementresponded to these addresses but had not been able to locate the mother [Enteredin HomeSafenet 10/31/2006].11/06/2006 – An additional e-mail is sent to the Sarasota Family YMCA fromSunCoast Family Safety Program Specialist Kathleen Matthews stating thatCourtney Clark has not been seen in 68 days. Request is made by SunCoastFamily Safety Program Office that a missing child report be completed forCourtney Clark by the supervising agency. Administrators from the SarasotaFamily YMCA and the Department of Children and Families Suncoast Region areamong the recipients of this information.11/08/2006 – SunCoast Family Safety Program Specialist Kathleen Matthewssends correspondence to Trish Adams, Child Location Point of Contact for theSarasota Family YMCA, requesting an update on status of the case and the needfor paperwork to be completed.11/10/2006 – Case manager contacted Officer Dixon of the Grand Junction PoliceDepartment to ask for a report number for Ms. Farris’ case. Officer Dixon statedthat they never took a report, but that they have been attempting to locate Ms.Farris. He said that the case was recorded with the dispatch when the casemanager made the call requesting assistance. Officer Dixon stated that hebelieved that Ms. Farris, the paramour (Mr. Sisk) and her children are in Kentucky[Entered in HomeSafenet 11/10/2006].11/28/2006 – E-mail sent, to Trish Adams, Child Location Point of Contact forSarasota Family YMCA from the SunCoast Family Safety Program SpecialistKathleen Matthews asking why law enforcement had not taken a missing childreport and for Sarasota Family YMCA to follow up immediately.11/30/2006 – Case manager contacted Cynthia Martell (non-relative caregiver) toinquire if she had heard anything from Ms. Farris. Ms. Martell was not availableand the case manager left a voicemail message requesting a return phone call[Entered in HomeSafenet 11/30/2006].11/30/2006 – Case manager entered a note in HomeSafenet that the whereaboutsof the mother and child were unknown. The reason a face-to-face visit was notattempted was – Absconded/Abducted [Entered in HomeSafenet 11/30/2006].29

12/18/2006 – Memo to Trish Adams, Child Location Point of Contact for SarasotaFamily YMCA, from the SunCoast Family Safety Program Specialist KathleenMatthews requesting update on efforts to locate and recover child from State ofColorado. Requested due date of 12/19/2006.12/19/2006 – Response received from Trish Adams, Child Location Point ofContact for the Sarasota Family YMCA, with a timeline of the actions taken by thecase manager since child was removed by Ms. Farris. Request for information resentas to status of the pick-up order being provided to law enforcement inColorado, along with a request for a missing persons report so that Courtney couldbe placed in the National Crime Information Center database.12/27/2006 – E-mail correspondence sent to Trish Adams, Child Location Point ofContact for the Sarasota Family YMCA from SunCoast Family Safety ProgramSpecialist Kathleen Matthews stating that Courtney Clark was still not officiallylisted as a missing child in the Department’s Missing Child Tracking System due toadditional information being needed.12/28/2006 – E-mail correspondence sent to Trish Adams, Child Location Point forthe Sarasota Family YMCA from SunCoast Family Safety Program SpecialistKathleen Matthews requesting an update on status of reporting Courtney Clarkmissing. Ms. Matthews offered assistance with this process if needed.12/29/2006 – The Missing Child Reporting Form was completed by SarasotaFamily YMCA and child entered into the DCF Missing Child Tracking System.Missing Child Alert for Courtney Clark is activated in HomeSafenet.01/02/2007 – Courtney Clark case begins appearing on the Department’s DailyMissing Child Issue List as not having an active missing child case entered into theFlorida Crime Information Center/National Crime Information Center data systems.01/02/2007 – A file review of Courtney Clark's case was completed by TrishAdams as part of a Sarasota YMCA Tier 1 quality assurance process. Findings ofthe review included deficits in general case practice requirements involving safety,placement stability, reunification, case manager visitation, case worker supervisionand indicated procedures were not followed pertaining to an abducted child. Thecase file review did not result in an issuance of a Request for Assistance or otheractions by the Sarasota YMCA.01/03/2007 – E-mail correspondence sent to Trish Adams, Child Location Point ofContact for the Sarasota Family YMCA from SunCoast Family Safety ProgramSpecialist Kathleen Matthews. Daily issues list dated 01/03/2007 was forwarded.01/04/2007 – E-mail correspondence sent to Trish Adams, Child Location Point ofContact for the Sarasota Family YMCA from SunCoast Family Safety ProgramSpecialist Kathleen Matthews. Daily issues list dated 01/04/2007 was forwarded.30

01/08/2007 – E-mail correspondence sent to Trish Adams, Child Location Point ofContact for the Sarasota Family YMCA from SunCoast Family Safety ProgramSpecialist Kathleen Matthews. Daily issues list dated 01/08/2007 forwarded withcomments on list stating “Provide status of obtaining p/u order and LE report toFSPO by Wed. 01/10/2007 COB.”01/12/2007 – E-mail correspondence sent to Trish Adams, Child Location Point ofContact for the Sarasota Family YMCA from SunCoast Family Safety ProgramSpecialist Kathleen Matthews. Daily issues list dated 01/12/2007 forwarded withcomments on list stating “Still no P/U order filed. Please provide status of obtainingp/u order and making LE report by Wed. 01/17/2007.”01/16/2007 – E-mail correspondence sent to Trish Adams, Child Location Point ofContact for the Sarasota Family YMCA from SunCoast Family Safety ProgramSpecialist Kathleen Matthews. . Daily issues list dated 01/16/2007 forwarded withcomments on list stating “What is status of P/U order and LE report? Providestatus by 01/17/2007.”01/17/2007 – E-mail correspondence sent to Trish Adams, Child Location Point ofContact for the Sarasota Family YMCA from SunCoast Family Safety ProgramSpecialist Kathleen Matthews with possible address information on potential familyand non-relative resources for follow-up related to missing child efforts to locate.01/19/2007 – HomeSafenet notes show that the case manager attempted to reportCourtney Clark as missing to the Lake County Sheriff’s Office. Case manager istold according to internal policy of the Lake County Sheriff’s Office that a missingchild report must be made in person. Lake County Sheriff’s Office refers casemanager to the Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office to collect the information neededfor reporting purposes and to request that the Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office faxthe report back to the Lake County Sheriff’s Office for case opening [Entered inHomeSafenet 01/25/2007].01/19/2007 – SunCoast Family Safety Program Specialist Kathleen Matthewsreceived a response from Trish Adams, Child Location Point of Contact for theSarasota Family YMCA stating that the Sarasota Family YMCA had checked theaddress provided on 01/17/2007 indicating no one living at the address had anyinformation on this case.01/23/2007 – Case manager contacted Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office in an effortto report Courtney Clark as missing. An officer is dispatched to the casemanager’s office and a missing child report is taken [Entered in HomeSafenet01/25/2007].31

01/24/2007 – Case manager checks to make sure that the Lake County Sheriff’sOffice has received the faxed report. Lake County Sheriff’s Office indicates thatthey had not received the report [Entered in HomeSafenet 01/25/2007].01/25/2007 – Case manager checks to make sure that the Lake County Sheriff’sOffice has received the faxed report from the Pinellas County Sheriff’s office. LakeCounty Sheriff’s Office indicates that they had received the report from the PinellasCounty Sheriff’s Office and that the case manager should call back in the morningto receive the case number [Entered in HomeSafenet 01/25/2007].01/26/2007 – Detective Vachon* of the Lake County Sheriff’s Office provides thecase manager with a missing child report case number (07-014081)*HomeSafenet note shows name as Dechon. Should be Vachon.02/08/2007 – SunCoast Family Safety Program Specialist Kathleen Matthewsspoke with Melanie Laurella, a Florida Department of Law Enforcement MissingChildren Information Clearinghouse Analyst, regarding Courtney Clark. Ms.Matthews told Ms. Laurella that Courtney is missing from a non-relative placementand that Lake County Sheriff’s Office has taken a report. Ms. Matthews furtherexplained it is the impression of the Lake County Sheriff’s Office, as advised bythe Assistant State Attorney’s Office in Lake County “it appears the child cannot belisted as missing in the Florida Crime Information Center/National CrimeInformation Center databases because the mother’s rights were not terminated,she only violated a civil order.” Ms. Matthews advised the Lake County Sheriff’sOffice that the mother was not supposed to have custody of Courtney. Ms.Laurella also noted that the Pinellas County pick-up order had not been enteredinto Florida Crime Information Center/National Crime Information Centerdatabases.02/09/2007 – SunCoast Family Safety Program Specialist Kathleen Matthewssends correspondence to Melanie Laurella, Florida Department of LawEnforcement Missing Children Information Clearinghouse Analyst, with sixpotential names, addresses and contact numbers on individuals who may haveinformation on the whereabouts of Ms. Farris and Courtney Clark.02/13/2007 – SunCoast Family Safety Program Specialist Kathleen Matthewssends e-mail correspondence to Trish Adams, Child Location Point of Contact forthe Sarasota Family YMCA, regarding the lack of a missing child report into theFlorida Crime Information Center/National Crime Information Center data systems.02/13/2007 – Ms. Laurella, Florida Department of Law Enforcement MissingChildren Information Clearing House Analyst, contacted the Lake County Sheriff’sOffice. Ms. Laurella requested that Detective Vachon fax a copy of the pick-uporder. The court documentation states that Ms. Farris is not to have custody ofCourtney Clark and that law enforcement can take the child “into custody usingwhatever force necessary and/or by any means necessary.” Ms. Laurella spokewith the Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office about the pick-up order.32

02/14/2007 – Ms. Laurella, Florida Department of Law Enforcement MissingChildren Information Clearing House Analyst, is advised by Pinellas CountySheriff’s Office that the warrant division does not enter pick-up orders into FloridaCrime Information Center/National Crime Information Center. Pick-up orders areturned over to the Child Protection Unit so the determination can be made to enterthe pick-up order into Florida Crime Information Center/National Crime InformationCenter. (From summary information provided by Ms. Laurella on 06/19/2007.)02/16/2007 – Ms. Laurella, Florida Department of Law Enforcement MissingChildren Information Clearinghouse Analyst, and Florida Department of LawEnforcement Special Agent Supervisor Condon spoke with Lake County Sheriff’sOffice about the case. (From summary information provided by Ms. Laurella on06/19/2007.)02/18/2007 – Courtney Clark’s missing child case is entered into the Florida CrimeInformation Center/National Crime Information Center data systems by the LakeCounty Sheriff’s Office (Missing child report case number 07-014081).02/19/2007 – Missing child case is transferred to the Florida Department of LawEnforcement Missing Children Information Clearinghouse for case opening. TheFlorida Department of Law Enforcement/Missing Children InformationClearinghouse transfers missing child case to the National Center for Missing andExploited Children for case opening.04/18/2007 – Case manager receives case opening packet from the NationalCenter for Missing and Exploited Children [Entered in HomeSafenet 04/18/2007].06/13/2007 – Melissa Remy, Florida Department of Law Enforcement/MissingChildren Information Clearinghouse Analyst, identifies possible location forMichael Sisk in Wisconsin. Information is forwarded to Detective Vachon of theLake County Sheriff’s Office.06/14/2007 – Courtney Clark is recovered by the Portage, Wisconsin PoliceDepartment.33

Executive SummaryOn June 14, 2007, law enforcement officers found a missing Florida child, 2-yearold Courtney Alisa Clark, in a Portage, Wisconsin home. A preliminaryinvestigation that revealed Courtney had been missing from her court-orderedplacement for four months before she was reported missing. As a result, FloridaDepartment of Children and Families Secretary Bob Butterworth ordered athorough review of the case. The review was conducted from June 18, 2007,through June 25, 2007, by headquarters Quality Assurance staff.The scope of the review included an analysis of prior child protectiveinvestigations; HomeSafenet chronological case recordings; and the open casemanagement services record provided by the Safe Children Coalition, thecommunity-based care lead agency in Pinellas County that is operated by theSarasota Family YMCA.The review uncovered significant problems and concerns in five areas: Reportinga Missing Child, Reunification, Assessment of New Child Born into an ActiveCase, Home Study, and Courtesy Supervision.The review also revealed that despite prompts from the SunCoast Region to theSarasota Family YMCA, along with numerous HomeSafenet entries pertaining toCourtney’s status as missing, the issue was not acted on by senior leaders at theSarasota Family YMCA or senior managers at the Department of Children andFamilies. Prompt, effective action to report the child as missing was not taken byeither organization.In response to these findings the Department is proposing changes andimprovements that include the following:• Establish a zero tolerance policy for failure to follow missing childrenprocedures related to reporting and locating missing children.• Direct Department senior management to review cases where in-statechildren have not been seen according to policy. If a child is identified asmissing as a result of these reviews, immediately follow procedures toreport that child as missing to local law enforcement.• Further explore technology options to assist in locating children in care.• Require the Sarasota Family YMCA to specifically address thedeficiencies outlined in this report.

The health and safety of children in the care of our community-based careagencies and contract providers are the responsibility of the Department ofChildren and Families.Due to the serious nature of the findings outlined in the Quality AssuranceReview, many of the recommendations will be implemented immediately.###

Operation SafeKidsStatus UpdateAugust 13, 2007Finding Action Taken Additional Action Pending/NeededReporting & Investigating Missing Children Cases1. Definition of Missing Child not clear Has been addressed in both Department policy(Operating Procedure 175-85 issued in October of2002 and Florida Administrative Rule 65C30.019(promulgated in June of 2006)No additional action needed.2. Reporting and documenting missing childepisodes was burdensome and error proneThe Department’s Missing Child Tracking Systemwas developed and deployed statewide in thespring of 2003. The system has demonstrated anability to manage over 2000 missing childtransactions (episodes opened and resolved) on amonthly basis while allowing for timelydocumentation of missing child episodes and easyidentification of potential reporting and datadiscrepancies across multiple data systems on adaily basis (HomeSafenet/Florida Safe FamiliesNetwork, Florida Crime Information Center(FCIC)/National Crime Information Center (NCIC),Florida Department of Law Enforcement/MissingChildren Information Clearinghouse data system)The current system is functioning. However,there are plans to integrate the Department’sMissing Child Tracking System into theFlorida Safe Families Network an effort tostreamline the interaction between theMissing Child Tracking System and theFlorida Safe Families Network.3. Better coordination between theOne FTE remains locate at the FloridaDepartment and local and state lawDepartment of Law Enforcement/Missing Childrenenforcement was needed.Information Clearinghouse on a full time basis and‣ Data in all reporting systems need to be assists in synchronizing missing child data acrossin syncall of the data systems while ensuring that anyquestions that FDLE/MCIC may have on aspecific missing child case are forwarded to the1Information Source: Status Report on Findings and Recommendations for Operation SafeKids (June 2003)No additional action required.

4. Some children who were categorized asmissing could have been located with asimple data check.‣ Some children reported missing by theDepartment were receiving publicassistance from the agency and couldhave been located prior to being reportingas missingproper individual for resolution. In addition, localCBC Child Location Point of Contacts are in placethroughout the state to proved assistance to localand state law enforcement.Addressed, but not completely.Clarification in definition of when to report a childas missing and the inclusion of basic initial childlocation efforts that should be conducted by thecaregiver or case manger in Operating Procedure175-85 and Florida Administrative Rule65C30.019 has greatly reduce the number ofcases where the location of a child could havebeen identified through a simple database check.Note: CFOP 175-85 includes specificefforts to locate, but CBCs are not requiredto follow it. 65C-30.019 includes very basicefforts to locate the child, but do not specifywhat internal data checks should be done tolocate children.Action to be taken:Revision of 65C-30.019 to specify whatminimum data search requirement shall beconducted within a specific time frame forchildren reported missing.5. Adults that have absconded with a childare not in the FCIC/NCIC system.FDLE training memo sent in the fall of 2002Note: The Department in partnership withFDLE submitted draft language to modifyCH. 39 to the Florida Senate Committee onChildren, Families, and Elder Affairs thatrequires local law enforcement to acceptmissing children reports from theDepartment, CBCs and Sheriffs officeproviding child investigative services to thedepartment and the reports shall includewhen available, identifying informationregarding any adults who may beaccompanying or accompanying orabducting the missing child.How to enter an adult into FCIC/NCIC toallow linking to a child has been discussedwith FDLE and Connie Schingledecker, butthe best way for local law enforcement to dothis has not been determined.2Information Source: Status Report on Findings and Recommendations for Operation SafeKids (June 2003)

Action to be takenThe workgroup related to reviewing theOperation SafeKids recommendationsshould investigate options and proposeoptions on how to address this.6. Dual entry of children that have beenadjudicated delinquent or have outstandingwarrants7. Lack of communication betweenDepartment staff and local law enforcementduring the location and recovery of the child.• FDLE received authorization from the NationalCriminal Justice Information System workinggroup for dual entry of children who werecategorized as both missing and wanted intothe FCIC/NCIC system in the fall of 2002.• An extremely small number of children whoare categorized as missing from the care orsupervision of the state still appear as wantedwithin the FCIC/NCIC system. However,these children usually have felony criminalwarrants entered into the FCIC/NCIC system,which makes the entry of a missing child caseinto the FCIC/NCIC system a possible officersafety issue.The Department established local Child LocationPoints of Contacts for each DCF District in thespring of 2003. These positions have since beentransferred to the community based care provideragencies. While the expectation that thesepositions will work with local law enforcement on aroutine basis remains, issues related to thefrequency and effectiveness of communicationbetween social service providers and local lawenforcement remainNo additional action requiredAdditional child location resources are beingadded within the Department with a primaryfocus on coordination with law enforcement:• five Region level Child LocationCoordinator positions with anexpectation that these individuals willplace a priority on improving thefrequency and quality of communicationbetween contracted service providersand local law enforcement in an effort toenhance child location efforts.• Director of Justice Services to facilitatecoordination and communication at thestate level.8. Validation of efforts The Missing Child Reporting and Location Guide3Information Source: Status Report on Findings and Recommendations for Operation SafeKids (June 2003)

‣ Case workers not routinely updating locallaw enforcement on helpful info.‣ Department needed timely access to localpolice reports to evaluate theeffectiveness of the reporting process9. Pertinent information was not accessible toanyone other than the caseworker.was distributed in the winter of 2006 and furtheremphasized this issue.FSFN has a chrono note case type for missingchild effort to locate.• 2003: DCF agreed to maintain a centralizedfile to allow access to information 24/7.• The discretion on how to best manage thecase files of missing children was given to theCBC lead agency providers when casemanagement services were transferred.Action to be taken:• Will be addressed in training and by theRegional Child Location Specialist at thelocal level if it is a problem.• Revised 65C-30.019 will require caseworkers to provide local law enforcementaccess to the child’s file.10. Law enforcement and DCF could benefitfrom mulit-disciplinary training that focusedon roles and responsibilities of each.• Train the trainer was developed by DCF andFDLE and delivered in the Spring of 2003.In-Process :• Currently developing training as part ofthe C. Clarke action to be delivered tokey parties (law enforcement, CBCproviders, DCF staff).• CFOP 175-85 and Administrative Rule 65C-11. Information received from debriefing30.019 require that a child will be interviewedrunaway children when recovered provided by the caseworker within 24 hours of thevaluable insight and information that required child’s return to determine service andadditional investigation.placement needs.• A referral for a mental health evaluation mustbe made if it is determined that the child ranaway.• A behavioral review of ComprehensiveBehavioral assessment will be completed bythe Behavior Analyst Services Project and theAnalyst will provide assistance in developingan individualized prevention plan.• The Behavior Analyst Services Project (BASP)meet at least annually to develop aMemorandum of Understanding that identifies4Information Source: Status Report on Findings and Recommendations for Operation SafeKids (June 2003)Note: Information received from debriefingrunways upon their return is used in avariety of ways or not used at all, as there isno requirement related to this.Action to be taken:Revision of 65C30.019 to address minimumrequirements for preventing and interveningwith youth who run from care, to include theminimum requirements for debriefing.

priorities for project, based on their localneeds.• The importance and requirement for debriefinghas been discussed several times duringquarterly conference calls with child locationpoints of contact and a variety of debriefingtools have been provided.12. Overuse of pickup orders • 2004: Workgroup formed to review use ofpick-up orders, resulting in directivesregarding use.• Directive was given by General Counsel not topursue pick-up orders on children in careunless required by local law enforcement toaccept a child report or ordered by the court(Miami and Palm Beach).• Current policy is to request pick-up orders ifrequired by local law enforcement to make amissing child report.13. Two scenarios apply to the concealmentof missing children aided by parents, family,friends.‣ Legal custodians, parents are notappraised by the Judge or the caseworkerthat leaving or removing the child from thestate is in violation of the court order; or‣ Legal custodians, parents are aware theyare in violation of court orders. However,no criminal reports are filed allowing lawenforcement to seek arrest warrants forthe perpetrators.On 4/23/07, the General Counsel’s sent an emailto all child welfare legal staff requesting they usethe language below in all custody orders to permitlocal law enforcement to generate missing childreports.The language states:The parent or parents who have custodypursuant to this order must notify the casemanager within two (2) days of any changeswith regards to where the child resides, attendsschool or daycare, or any other changes in thechild’s location of care. The parent/parentsare prohibited from removing the child from thecourt’s judicial circuit without prior approval ofthe court and entry of an order authorizingthem to do so. Should the parents fail tocomply with these requirements or the child beunable to be located, the Department may, atthe department’s discretion, notify local lawenforcement and submit a missing child report.No additional action needed at this time.Currently addressing issues through workwith the Children Families and Elder AffairsSenate Committee.5Information Source: Status Report on Findings and Recommendations for Operation SafeKids (June 2003)

14. A number of runaways were located inDJJ facilities.This language is designed to allow lawenforcement to proceed with all missing childprotocols including the commencement of acomplete investigation.• Admin. Rule 65C-29.013 outlines reasonableefforts to locate family• CPI to inform parents not to move withoutnotification.• No requirement that the State Attorney. Officemust pursue warrants for parents.The checking of missing children within the DJJsystem proved to be of limit value and is no longerpart of he DCF intake processIn place of the centralized check DJJ has beengive access to Florida Safe Families Networksystem.DCF and DJJ MOU:• Share information on jointly served youthStanding committees at the local level in manyareasDirector of Justice Services and RegionalChild Location Specialists will address if it isidentified as a problem. Currently, it is not.15. Officers who recovered children had towait for extended periods of time to for thecaseworker to respond.16. Case activity entries into HomeSafenetwere not consistently being documentedthroughout the state.• Expectation that CBC providers will addressthis as part of their working relationship withlocal law enforcement and provide contactinformation 24/7.• Last week, sent email reminder to childlocation points of contact to ensure they haveaddressed with local law enforcement.• Plan to integrate into HSN didn’t happen dueto higher priority HomeSafetnet builds.• Efforts were not required to be entered into theMissing Child Tracking System because theplan was to integrate into HSN.• Efforts are entered into Florida Safe FamilyNetwork (FSFN) as chrono notes. In someareas, they are good about documenting and6Information Source: Status Report on Findings and Recommendations for Operation SafeKids (June 2003)Regional Child Location Specialist willmonitor and address at the local level ifidentified as an issue.Action to be taken:Revision of 65C-30.019 will require a 24/7contact information to be provided to locallaw enforcement.• Currently meeting with FSFN to integratethe MCTS.• Regional Child Location staff will providemonitoring and training related todocumenting efforts to located.

monitoring efforts and other areas, they arenot.17. Some children (ages 14 – 18) gave birthwhile missing/on runaway and there was nopolicy to automatically afford DCFresponsibility for the baby and mother’s care.65C-30.016 requires:The services worker to promptly conduct a homevisit and assess the safety of the new born andstaff with Child Welfare Legal Services ifregarding the filing of a petition.18. Policies for sheriff’s offices and policydepartments accepting reports from DCF varyacross the state;‣ Some police departments will not acceptreports of children who ran from sheltersand will refer DCF to the homejurisdiction.19. DCF closes their case on a youth whoturns 18 and notifies law enforcement. Insome cases, DCF notifies law enforcementthe case is closed, but fails to notify that thechild has been located.This has been addressed by SB 1454.• Letters/forms were sent to local lawenforcement from central office. Stoppedbecause the field wanted to be responsible totouch base with local law enforcement. Thisis best done at the local level.• Requirement per CFOP 175-85, thecaseworker is to notify local law enforcementthat the youth has turned 18 and to provide acopy/or access to a copy of the youth’s file.• When the child is reported as missing, local20. In some cases, DCF determines that a law enforcement should be notified of who torecovered child should be returned to acontact upon recovery of a child.placement, but fails to notify law enforcement. • Identification of a placement for lawenforcement to place a child is not the bestoption, since circumstances of the recoveryare not known and a placement may not havebeen identified/approved/available.• Communication and working relationship withlocal law enforcement and community based7Information Source: Status Report on Findings and Recommendations for Operation SafeKids (June 2003)• In general, this has been addressed.Although issues related to children whogo missing while under an abuseinvestigation or protective supervisionremain.• Additional clarification may be needed toallow law enforcement to close a missingchild case based on information providedby the Department or community basedcare provider, while complying withaccreditation requirements in this area.Action to be taken:Revision of 65C-30.019 will address caseclosure procedures, to include offering locallaw enforcement a complete copy of theyouth’s file.

1. The ability to exchange information andphotographs between states would helplocate and recover children from other statescare providers and DCF.Public Awareness & Outreach• Locator system provided to the Department tocommunicate to other states.• Federal funding to introduce the LocatorSystem in other states was never madeavailable.• Flyers are currently available withinFlorida via the FDLE web site and at theNational Center for Missing andExploited Children (NCMEC) for thosecases that meet NCMEC postingstandards.2. Photos on children reported as missinghelp make public aware and leads from thepublic are the best sources for locating andrecovering children.‣ Recommendation: DCF is pursuingavenues for posting information andphotos of their missing children (non-profitgroups, community groups, civicorganizations, schools, are potentialoptions for assistance in distributingflyers.1. Some children are located out of state orout of the country. Persons involved in thesecases must be aware of the Uniform ChildCustody Jurisdiction Enforcement Act andinternational treaties. This is out of the scopeof the day to day operations of mostcaseworkers.• During Operations SafeKids, took pictures ofall children in care.• Legislation was passed in 2001 – 2002modifying confidentiality restrictions to allowthe Department to post information for childrenreported as missing from state care.Recovery2003: Child location points of contact wereestablished at the district and central office levelswithin the Department.Actions to be taken:Revision of 65C-30.019 will address thesharing of photos of children reportedmissing to local law enforcement.The Regional child location position willbe trained to assist and providetechnical assistance on these issues.2. Several children reported missing werebelieved to be outside of the United States,investigators were unable to gain cooperationfrom authorities. FBI, U.S. Customs, and theCurrently coordinate recovery efforts through NationalCenter for Missing and Exploited Children for thesetypes of cases.8Information Source: Status Report on Findings and Recommendations for Operation SafeKids (June 2003)

National Center for Missing and ExploitedChildren assisted with some.3. Orlando PD responded to 17 calls fromDCF to take reports on children who ran fromtheir offices.‣ Recommendation: establish a supervisedlocation within each facility that is suitableto place runaways when recovered.Actions to be taken:Revision of 65C-30.019 will address theminimum requirements related to theprevention and stabilization of youththat run from care.• This is a challenge.• These youth cannot be detainedin secure placements to stopthem from running. Childrenplaced in secure placements(residential mental healthtreatment, juvenile justice) mustmeet certain eligibility criteria.• The community based careproviders, the Department andstakeholders need to addressthis issue at the local and statelevel.• Best Practice: therapeutic fosterhome placements with intensive andindividualized wrap around serviceshave been successful in stabilizingrunaways.• Jacksonville BASP has apilot project in process.Prevention9Information Source: Status Report on Findings and Recommendations for Operation SafeKids (June 2003)

1. The lack of photographs has been aproblem for investigators trying to locatechildren. Only 28% of the DCF childrenfeatured on the FDLE web site have photos.2. The majority of missing children cases arerunaways and many habitual. Proactivepreparation of individual placements isneeded to promote the stability of runawaychildren upon their return.Florida Administrative Rule 65C-30.004 requires:♦ All children entering an in-home or out-of-homecare placement have their photo taken. In-homeplacement requirements are that a photo be takenof a child within 15 days of case being staffed andtransferred to a service unit;♦ Out-of-home placement requirements are that aphoto be taken of a child within 72 hours of theremoval episode;♦ Children age 0 to 59 months need to have photosupdated every six months until the child reaches 60months of age and that children age 60 monthsand older need to have photos updated annuallyuntil they reach the age of18;♦ Any child reported as missing who is subsequentlylocated needs to have his/her photo takenimmediately unless the child’s appearance has notchanged significantly since their last photograph.Please review the entire Florida AdministrativeRule for any further requirements (i.e. childrenplaced out of state).• Best practice, per the Reporting Guide, quarterlystate wide conference calls, CFOP 175-85 and theRunaway Workshop suggest:• Placement options be explored while thechild is on runaway to determine bestoptions based on need and to plan forreturn;• Upon return, assess needs for additionalplacement and services.• The existence and availability of placements forthese youth vary across the state.• Challenge is youth who run frequently and limitedability to intervene when the youth’s location isknown.Actions to be taken:Revision of 65C-30.019 will address thesharing of photos of children reportedmissing to local law enforcement.• Up to 80% of children open withFDLE have photos posted on FDLEweb site/transferred to FDLE withphotos.• HomeSafenet report shows 75% ofchildren have photos.• A document was sent to childlocation points of contact providinginformation on the requirement andspecific instructions. This has beenan going discussion of everyquarterly conference call for the last2 years.This remains a challenge.Actions to be taken:Revision of 65C-30.019 will address theminimum requirements related to theprevention and stabilization of youththat run from care.3. Several runaway children were debriefed This would require statutory change to add physicalby DCF and local law enforcement after they abuse and remove age parameters currently in place.10Information Source: Status Report on Findings and Recommendations for Operation SafeKids (June 2003)

were located and it seemed a lot of thesechildren were running to family, relatives tofind their own alternative placements.‣ Recommendation: The hotline shouldaccept all reports related to child on childphysical/sexual abuse and jointlyinvestigate with local law enforcement.4. At times, fingerprints or DNA is needed topositively identify a missing child.‣ Recommendation: Law enforcementsuggests DCF collect and store DNAsamples without analysis for childrenunder school age.5. Some districts noted a routine placementpattern of children leaving from a non-securefacility, without the prior knowledge orapproval of the caregiver, only to return a fewhours later.‣ Recommendation: Review policy relatedto the reporting of children over the nextyear after data on these children can bereviewed.6. Of the 393 children missing, 121 (35%)were 17 or older and 41 emancipated duringthe course of Operation SafeKids.‣ Recommendation:DCF to explore early emancipation ortransition to IL for runaways who arewithin a year of turning 18.June 2003: The Department collects DNA sampleswhen there is a question of paternity. There are noplans to expand this practice.• The Missing Child Tracking System was updated toallow analysis of data related to these children.• 65C-30.019 and CFOP 175-85 providesinstructions to caregivers on their efforts to locate(up to four hours for non-exigent circumstances)prior to reporting the child missing to local lawenforcement.• The number of these children is down incomparison to 2003.• Recent legislation 409.1451(3)(a)3. F.S.outlines requirements for thedevelopment and implementation of normalcyplans.• During Operations SafeKids, there was emphasisplaced on the increased use of subsidizedindependent living placements.• 2114SB –effective in July 1: all children at age 16must have a formal assessment for subsidized IL.Action to be taken:The Child Protection Task Forceworkgroup on missing children will workwith DCF to explore the possibility ofcollecting and storing DNA.Finding:Current data indicates that childrenbeing transferred for case opening tothe FDLE have generally been missingfor over one day. Therefore, this is nota major issue at this time.Actions to be taken:Revision of 65C-30.019 will address theminimum requirements related to theprevention and stabilization of youththat run from care.Legislative Action11Information Source: Status Report on Findings and Recommendations for Operation SafeKids (June 2003)

1. Runaways comprise the majority of allmissing children, including those missingfrom DCF care. While the state has someexcellent programs and facilities that dealwith runaway children, it appears that thereneeds to be more options and resources forthese children who are running away fromDCF placement.• Comprehensive residential group care lost statefunding.• There is a comprehensive array of communitybehavioral health services and mental healthresidential treatment services for eligiblechildren/youth.• However, assessing needs for services andsupports and obtaining services and supports inthe short window of time when the youth is inphysical custody is extremely challenging(procedures for approval, waiting lists)Action to be taken:CBC lead agencies should, incollaboration with other communitypartners, conduct an assessment oftheir system of care as it relates to theneeds of teens in out of home care todetermine if current resources can beused more effectively and to identifygaps and actions to address.2. Parents who are being investigated forabuse are not required to report to DCF ifthey move or relocate. Consequently, thereare no sanctions in place to insure that theabuse complaint is fully investigated and thechild is not further abused.3. There were a few instances in which thechild (and/or absconding adult) was located inanother state. The other state agency wasnot aware that the child was missing fromFlorida and has no knowledge of any pendingabuse allegations against the family.39.301(23): If CPI makes contact with a parent andinforms them to notify them of a change of address orplacement status of a child within 2 business days theCPI may report the child missing to LLE.• There is no universal SACWIS computer system toallow the checking of records from other states.• National Crime Information Center access to socialservice agencies is allowed under federalguidelines but is universally available throughoutthe country.Addressing through work with theSenate staff: when/if to closeinvestigation and under whatcircumstances will be clarified.12Information Source: Status Report on Findings and Recommendations for Operation SafeKids (June 2003)

Final Progress Report on the Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Task Force (11/03) provides the last update on all recommendations.Updated 6/20/07Updated 8/14/07The Governor’s Blue Ribbon Panel on Child ProtectionStatus UpdateJune 2007Recommendations:Immediate1a. Notify law enforcementimmediately when there is reason tobelieve a child is missing.1b. Law enforcement immediatelyenter information into the MissingChild Information Tracking SystemActions TakenCompleted• Training provided to law enforcement,FDLE, DCF• Caregivers, case workers and providersinstructed to report children missing• CFOP 175-85: Prevention, Reporting andServices to Missing Children finalized10/17/02 that defines “missing children” andprovides instruction on how to report andrecover missing children and preventchildren from running from out of home careand stabilize them when they are return.• Developed of a web based Missing ChildTracking System (MCTS) in September2002, which allows the department to trackthe number of children reported as missingfrom care in real time and to electronicallyreport missing children to state lawenforcement.• Created locally based Missing ChildrenPoints of Contact that collaborate with locallaw enforcement to report and locatemissing children;• Created a Missing Children Unit within thedepartment located in Tallahassee that:• Co-locates a Missing Child Unit staffperson at the Florida Department ofCurrent Status• The locally based Missing Children Points of Contactfunction was moved to Community Base Careproviders.• DCF established Child Location Specialist positions ineach region. The Department’s Missing Children Unitworks directly with the CBC Missing Children Points ofContact on a daily basis to ensure children arereported correctly and provide technical assistancerelated to the reporting process, working with local lawenforcement, and the prevention and stabilization ofrunways.• The DCF Missing Children Unit developed a reportingand recovery handbook, with input from the localMissing Children Points of Contact and FDLE, thatprovides step by step instructions on:• How and when caregivers report a child missing;• How case workers are to report a child missing tolocal law enforcement and via the MCTS;• How to work with local law enforcement to recovera child.• DCF promulgated Administrative Rule 65C-30.019,effective May 4, 2006, that outlines requirementsrelated to the reporting and recovery of missingchildren and interviewing upon their return.

Final Progress Report on the Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Task Force (11/03) provides the last update on all recommendations.Updated 6/20/07Updated 8/14/07Law Enforcement (FDLE) to ensurechildren are reported correctly to stateand local law enforcement and thatchild-specific information is providedtimely to assist in the rapid recovery ofthe child;• Works directly with state and local lawenforcement and the Missing ChildrenPoints of Contact on a daily basis toensure children are reported timely andcorrectly as missing and as recovered;• Works with FDLE to identify issuesrelated to the reporting and recovery ofmissing children, to problem solvereporting and recovery issues at thelocal level and to identify and todisseminate effective practiceinformation related to the reporting andrecovery of missing children;• Instituted policy that establishes a uniformprocedure related to the timely reportingand recovery, stabilization and preventionefforts;• Established internal reports within thedepartment that are sent to the MissingChildren Points of Contact on a routinebasis (daily, weekly, monthly) to ensurechildren are reported correctly;• Established and monitors a missingchildren performance measure for theaverage number of children who aremissing per 1,000 children in home and outof home care.2. Notify foster parents they can losetheir license if they falsify records orsign blank visitation forms.CompletedDCF and CBC lead agencies distributed a letterin June 2002 to notify foster parents and

Final Progress Report on the Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Task Force (11/03) provides the last update on all recommendations.Updated 6/20/07Updated 8/14/07posted on the foster parent web site.3a. Visit each child under DCFsupervision each month.3b.Develop a credible verificationsystem to ensure each child is underDCF supervision is visited everymonth.CompletedDefined “face-to-face contact” and “whocompletes the visits” in administrative code.Amended provider contracts to includeperformance standard for face-to-face visits.Provided statewide training via videoteleconferencingon quality child visits.Provided statewide training on 2006 changes toChapter 39 and administrative code changes.Implemented new pre-service trainingcurriculum for investigative and casemanagement services.• Department of Health and Human Services InspectorGeneral report entitled State Standards and Ability toTrack Frequency of Caseworker Visits with Children inFoster Care (12/05) ranked Florida second best innation at tracking visits, but noted an opportunity toimprove the content of visits.• Admin. Rule 65C-30.007 was revised effective May 4,2006 to specify the requirements and standards forvisitation (assess health, permanency, etc.)• Performance measure for visitation in CBC providercontracts.• Visitation requirement recently changed in Admin. Rule65C-28.002 from every month to every 30 days tobetter ensure frequency of visitation.• Visitation requirement is core element in 3-Tier QAprocess, which is monitored internally by CBC providerand externally by QA.• Visitation lists of children not seen for 55 days withrequired child-specific follow-up by district and CBCproviders.• New federal requirements, Child and Family ServicesAct of 2006, to draw down IV-B funding (effective inSeptember) will monitor child visitation on two items:• % of assigned case worker visiting child eachmonth and;• % of visits taking place in the home/place wherethe child lives.• The quality child visits training focused on clinicalsupervision and what quality visits/contacts means.Visiting is how casework staff ensure children are safeand that their needs are being met. Visits allowcasework staff to continually assess a child’semotional, physical and social well-being, as well asgives quality one-on-one time between the caseworker and the child.• Reporting on contact with children was included in

Final Progress Report on the Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Task Force (11/03) provides the last update on all recommendations.Updated 6/20/07Updated 8/14/07Release 1 that went live July 30, 2007. Release 2 ofthe Florida Safe Families Network begins August 20,2007. A credible verification system for caseworkercontact with children is a key element of Release 2.4. Revise guidelines for the handlingof runaways that require immediatenotification of law enforcement,followed by a pick-up order.5. Implement a foster Care MediationBoard in District 11.6. Conduct criminal history checks onall new non-relative, relative andfoster care placement.Completed• DCF General Counsel Office instructedChild Welfare Legal Services not to usepick-up order unless it was the only meansto get local law enforcement to accept amissing child report.• Chapter 39 revised in 2006 (39.301(23)) toclarify the reporting of children (includingrunaways) under protective supervision asmissing.•Completed7a. Support GAL in reporting the Completed• Missing Children’s Unit identifies issues related to anddiscusses the use of pick-up orders with the localMissing Children Points of Contact on-going basis.• Issues related to the use of pick-up orders do notseem to be frequent.• CF Operating Procedure 175-85: Prevention,Reporting and Services to Missing Children addressesthe reporting of runaways and requires those thoughtto be a danger to themselves or others be classified asendangered and reported immediately to local lawenforcement.Completed • Chapter 39, F.S. revised effective July 1, 2006 toaddress this (section 39.0138).• Administrative Rule 65C-28.011 effective May 4, 2006provides detailed descriptions of the required criminal,delinquency and abuse/neglect history checks forplacements with relative and non-relatives in bothexigent and planned circumstances.• Administrative Rule 65C-30.018 (7) also providesguidelines for continuation of investigative activities orsupervision services when a family relocates to a newcounty or when supervision services are needed inanother county for a case participant. Criminal,delinquency and abuse history checks are to becompleted by the provider in the receiving county priorto placement of the child unless the agreed uponprotocol allows the sending provider to perform thisfunction. The final placement recommendation to thecourt is to be made by the services worker orsupervisor in the receiving county.

Final Progress Report on the Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Task Force (11/03) provides the last update on all recommendations.Updated 6/20/07Updated 8/14/07resources needed to have GALrepresentation for every child inevery dependency case in D 11.7b. Support GAL to determine whatresources are necessary to supportadministrative, supervisory, spaceand other infrastructure requirement.8. Determine and prepare an LBR oncost of equipping every caseworkerwith a laptop.9. Conduct a GAL-district retreat toidentify issues and establishmechanisms for conflict resolution.10a. Purchase and install Live Scanmachines.10b. FDLE to train users.10c. Obtain legislative funding tomaintain Live Scan equipment and toensure its availability in each district.11. Conduct an independent systemof care review in D 11.12. Support expansion of the Miami-Dade CBC Alliance.13. Complete entering of placementand home visitation information for allchildren in Home Safenet.14. Provide foster parents, andrelative and non-relative caregivers ahotline number to call if they do notreceive a home visit every 30 days.15a. Case files will contain a currentphotograph, fingerprints and birthverification of every dependent child.CompletedCompletedCompleted• 19 Live Scan 1000s machines originallypurchased• 34 additional purchased and allocatedbased on population• Staff trained to useCompletedCompletedCompletedCompleted• All Live Scan machines were turned over to the CBCproviders for their use.• Need to determine current use and functioning andneed for maintenance.Completed • CBC contract requirement• Monitoring of current photograph, fingerprints and birthverification was done. Element moved to Child andFamily Services Review (CFSR). As a core element,

Final Progress Report on the Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Task Force (11/03) provides the last update on all recommendations.Updated 6/20/07Updated 8/14/0715b. Recommend feasibility of DNAswab for every dependent child.16. Streamline pick-up orders andensure missing persons divisions inlaw enforcement knows of all suchchildren.17a. Support Miami-Dade publicschools in developing notificationprocedures for children who missthree consecutive days or is notregularly attending school.15b: University of Miami Ethics programconducted research, hosted and facilitatedmeetings to explore option and prepared a finalreport that did not recommend the collection ofDNA swabs due to concerns regardingprotection of banked DNA and implications ofsuch.current photograph, fingerprints and birth verificationwill be monitored in all levels of the 3-Tier qualityassurance review process.• Section 39.304, F.S., and 65C-30.004 effective May 4,2006 address photographs, fingerprints for children incare, as well as the timeframe for obtaining andupdating them.Completed • Standardized reporting process for reporting childrenmissing alleviate the need for pick-up orders.Department advised to notify courts pick-up orders arenot necessary as a missing children report will betaken by local law enforcement.• Pick-up orders only used when local law enforcementrequires to one accept missing person reports, whichis very infrequent.Completed17b. Support Miami-Dade PublicSchools in developing an electronicmethod for sharing schoolinformation consistent with legalrequirements.18a. Provide caseworkers access tocameras with date stamp capability.18b. Photograph every childquarterly.19. Recommend how to expand“Family Case Conferencing” inCompletedDCF and CBC staff provided with digitalcameras. District 14 system for maintainingphotos with child’s HomeSafenet ID wasimplemented statewide.2,961 cameras purchased.• 65C-30.004, F.A.C., effective May 4, 2006, requireschildren under five be photographed every 6 monthsand children over five be photographed annually.• Missing child staff located at FDLE identifies childrenwithout photos and searches HomeSafenet. If onecannot be found, he contacts the case worker torequest a photo be provided.• Currently, 80% of the children on the FDLE web sitehave photos.Completed • Draft Florida Mental Health Institute evaluation reportson overall increase in use of Family Team

Final Progress Report on the Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Task Force (11/03) provides the last update on all recommendations.Updated 6/20/07Updated 8/14/07District 11. • Statewide training provided on how to dofamily case conferencing. DCF andcommunity based care staff were trainedand encouraged to use as a best practice.20. Conduct a study to understandwhy D11 has a lower rate ofemployee dismissals than otherdistricts and what, if anything shouldbe done about that.21. Convene a Children and FamiliesSummit in Miami-Dade.22. Develop a plan to achieveaccreditation in core functions.23a. Compare the performance andlongevity of child welfare staff withdegrees in social work or otherbehavioral sciences vis-à-vis otherdegreed staff.CompletedCompletedSeptember 18, 2002.Completed.CBCs are accredited or will be within 3 – 4years of start-up.23 a completeConferencing, Family Services Planning Teams, andFamily Group Decision Making. Without exception,lead agencies reported using multiple strategies toengage caregivers.23b. Determine if caseworker jobdescriptions are in keeping withnational standards for social andchild-welfare work.23c. Work with Florida universitiestoward a program where graduatescould receive certification as a childwelfare specialist.23b: workgroup looking at workload standardsand job descriptions.23c: Issuing RFP for training. 23c. DCF contracts with Florida Atlantic University toadminister the statewide student stipend program at mostpublic universities with schools of social work. Studentscommit to work in child welfare in exchange for financialsupport.24. Convene a series of localconferences to teach privateCompletedStudent Loan Program was discontinued due to lack oflegislative authority July 2007.

Final Progress Report on the Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Task Force (11/03) provides the last update on all recommendations.Updated 6/20/07Updated 8/14/07providers how to use the Home Five local conferences held with frontline HSnSafenet system.25a. Determine the effectiveness ofD11 human resources operations.25b. Ensure that employeesterminated for cause are neverrehired within DCF.25c. Ensure employees who resignin lieu of termination are indicated inthe system so as not to be eligible forrehire.users.Completed25d. Accredit the DCF HumanResources staff by the Society ofHuman Resource Management.26. Develop a plan to arrangealmost-instant Hotline access forcalling in English, Spanish andCreole.27. Provide and update relevantmedical information to foster parent,relative and non-relative placements.28. A task force reviews DCF policiesand procedures to streamline,condense and consolidate policies.CompletedLanguage proposed as part of rule revision tospecify what medical information is required.Present contract with MAXIMUS and ChildWelfare League of America to review andstreamline procedures65C-30.011 (4), F.A.C., effective May 4, 2006, addresseschild’s resource record. The child’s resource record mustcontain information on the child’s medical, dental,psychological, psychiatric, and behavioral history.Section 39.6012(2), F.S., effective July 1, 2006, alsoaddresses relevant medical information under case plantasks.Program Office promulgated four new administrative rulesthat provide guidance for implementing provisions ofFlorida Statutes that relate to children residing in out ofhome care, child protective investigations, services,interventions and case conduct expectations related tochild protection system. These include: 65C-28, 29, 30,and 31.Program Office currently promulgating 65C-13 and 15,

Final Progress Report on the Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Task Force (11/03) provides the last update on all recommendations.Updated 6/20/07Updated 8/14/07addressing licensing requirements for foster and grouphomes.29. Develop policies around theissue of placements with relativesand non-relatives who have a“positive” criminal background check.30. Complete background checks onall existing relative and non-relativecaregivers.31. Develop performance measuresthat accurately reflect thoseoutcomes that are reasonably withinthe control of DCF.32. Make D11 a national modelprogram in which federal-statefunding restrictions can be waived topursue innovative approaches tochild welfare.Completed • Chapter 39, F.S. revised to addresses this (section39.0138, and 39.401(3).Admin Rule 65C-28.011 and 65C-30.009 address checksfor relatives and non-relatives. Specifically requires thatan on-site check for safety and appropriateness of thecaregiver’s home, and initial criminal, delinquency, andabuse history checks must be performed, followed byfingerprinting of all adult household members, prior toplacement. It further directs that if a suitable relative ornon-relative is not located, then the court should bepetitioned to place the child in foster care.• Chapter 39, F.S. revised to addresses this (section39.0138).• Admin Rule 65C-28.011 provides detailed descriptionsof the required criminal, delinquency andabuse/neglect history checks for placements withrelatives and non-relatives.Completed • Missing child performance measure addresses rate ofchildren missing per 1,000 children in out of homecare.• Related measure are placement stability• Performance dashboard and leaderboard developed toreport performance.Not addressed in 11/03 final report. • New IVE waiver and Chapin Hall contract addressesthe intent of this recommendation.• IVE Waiver implemented 10/1/06. This federaldemonstration waiver allows federal IV-E foster carefunds to be used for any child welfare purpose.33. Support Foster Care Reviewpanels.DCF working with foster care review panelsand recommending changes to judicial reviewlanguage in statute so activities will be eligiblefor federal funding.• Chapter 39 was rewritten to comply with the Adoptionsand Safe Families Act during the 2006 Legislativesession.• Section 39.702 describes the requirements for citizenreview panels.

Final Progress Report on the Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Task Force (11/03) provides the last update on all recommendations.Updated 6/20/07Updated 8/14/07• Admin rule 65C-30.013 describes the statutorytimeframe for scheduling judicial review hearings andthe court’s standard for content and submission of theJudicial Review Social Study Report. addressesjudicial reviews.• IV-E Foster Care waiver on funding flexibility went intoeffect October 1, 2006.34. Recruit more pro bono attorneysfor children in DCF's custody.CompletedGov. Bush sent letter to President of FloridaBar requesting recruitment of more pro bonoattorneys.35. Expand additional co-locationand shared responsibilities of childwelfare staff and law enforcementofficers.36. Fully fund the Guardian Ad Litemprogram.37. Fully fund Healthy Families withinMiami-Dade County.38. Establish an estimatingconference that delineates fundingstreams and provides budgetprojections and requisite FTEs.39. Analyze DCF capacity to supportfield operations and community careproviders with quality-assurance,quality-monitoring and fiscal staff.CompletedEstablished 5 locations in D 11.Legislative recommendationLegislative recommendationLegislative recommendation• 11/03 final report (page 12- 14) discuss 3-Tier QA system as it was designed then.• Oversight and Accountability workgrouplooking at contract oversight activities andfunctional relationship with various otherQA activities performed by DCF.(Recommendation specific to District 11)• Local offices and local law enforcement have localworking arrangements in place in other areas of thestate.GAL received substantial increase in funding during the2006 Legislative session.Need input from FSPO on current status and relevance• 2003 Florida Legislature funded additional FTE toconduct quality assurance and oversight of childwelfare. As a result a 3 tier QA system wasimplemented. Currently, the QA system is beingreviewed and revised so as to provide better oversightand improved accountability. As of 7/07, nationallyrecognized consultant(s) have been tapped to facilitateand provide expertise. Department contracts for fiscalmonitoring for CBC lead agencies.

Final Progress Report on the Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Task Force (11/03) provides the last update on all recommendations.Updated 6/20/07Updated 8/14/0740. Provide a quick-response Legislative recommendationmechanism to allow the AgencySecretaries to shift appropriatedfunds from one program to another tomeet emergency needs.41. Pay caseworkers andsupervisors better based onmeritorious performance.42. Make all DCF employeesselected-exempt under the ServiceFirst initiative.43a. Address high staff turnover43b. Fund supervisory managementcourse to ensure outstandingmanagement.44. Determine how dependentchildren at age 5 can be enrolled inkindergarten.2003-2004 Appropriations Act included $30million for pay raises for front-line staff.Pay increases were comparable to CWLAnational averages.Recommendation made to Legislature. Allcareer services positions that met criteria forSES were transferred in July 2001.• 1,150 CBC and DCF supervisors trainedduring a series of managers retentionconferences.• Supervisory Effectiveness Training andQuality Case Management Training areprovided by department.Legislative recommendation• Currently offer Supervising for Excellence, Managingfor Excellence, Executive Leadership Program, andthe Leadership Institute.Section 39.604, F.S. requires children ages 3 to schoolentry under protective supervision or custody ofDepartment be enrolled in licensed early educationprogram or licensed child care program. Reportingrequirements for children who are absent also included.45. Develop an expedited rulemakingprocess.46. Amend "mandatory reporter"statute to include all individuals,including clergy, who volunteer withchildren.47. Amend foster parent licensingrequirements.Section 411.01(6), F. S. provides priority for participationin the school readiness program to children served by theFamily Safety Program.Legislative recommendationAdministrative Procedures Act describes instances foremergency or expedited rulemaking.Legislative recommendationChapter 39.201, F.S., defines mandatory reporters asanyone in Florida who knows or has reasonable cause tosuspect… Certain professions that are mandatoryreporters are required to leave their names.Legislative recommendation • Statewide workgroup met in 2006 to review licensingand make recommendations for rule revisions.• 65C-13 and 15 are currently in rule promulgationprocess. The rules detail licensing and re-licensing

Final Progress Report on the Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Task Force (11/03) provides the last update on all recommendations.Updated 6/20/07Updated 8/14/07criteria for foster homes and group homes. Next stepis filing final rules for adoption.• Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006implemented. It requires an abuse/neglect check fromother states for prospective foster/adoptive parentswhen they lived in another state(s) within the five yearperiod preceding their application to foster/adopt.48. Fund a supervisory-managementcourse to ensure outstandingmanagers.CompletedCurrently offer Supervising for Excellence, Managing forExcellence, Executive Leadership Program, and theLeadership Institute.