Washington State Courts - Boards, Commissions, Programs, and Organizations

Commission on Children in Foster Care

September 16, 2013

Members present:

Asst. Secretary Jennifer Strus, DSHS Children’s Administration (CA), Commission Co-Chair

Mr. Mike Canfield, Co-Chair, Foster Parents Association of Washington State

Mr. Ryan Cummings, Youth in Foster Care Representative

Mr. Ken Emmil, Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction

Ms. Chorisia Folkman, NW Intertribal Court System Representative

Ms. Jeannie Kee, Foster Youth Alumni Representative

Ms. Joanne Moore, Washington State Office of Public Defense

Ms. Tonia Morrison, Parent Advocate Representative

Mr. Ryan Murrey, Acting Executive Director of Washington State CASA

Judge Kitty-Ann van Doorninck, Superior Court Judges’ Association

Ms. Carrie Wayno, Attorney General’s Office

Members not present:

Justice Bobbe Bridge (ret.), Mr. Jim Bamberger, Ms. Beth Canfield; Rep. Ruth Kagi; Rep. Mary Helen Roberts

Guests:

Ms. Cindy Bricker, Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC); Ms. Hathaway Burden, Center for Children & Youth Justice (CCYJ); Mr. David Del Villar Fox, CA; Ms. Kelly Warner-King, CCYJ;
Ms. Laurie Lippold, Partners for Our Children

Staff present:

Ms. Jessica Birklid, CCFC Intern, CCYJ

Ms. Alyson McLean, CCFC Intern, CCYJ

Ms. Susan Peterson, AOC

Staff not present:

Mr. Michael Curtis, Executive Director

Call to Order

Asst. Secretary Jennifer Strus called the meeting to order.

Welcome and Introductions

Asst. Secretary Jennifer Strus welcomed Commission members and guests, and everyone introduced themselves. The Commission welcomed Ms. Jessica Birklid, the new CCFC Intern taking over for
Ms. Alyson McLean. Ms. Susan Peterson told members that due to reorganization at the AOC, Ms. Paula Malleck-Odegaard will be the new AOC staff person supporting the Commission starting in December.

Asst. Secretary Strus said she would be unable to stay for the entire meeting so Ms. Joanne Moore would chair the second part of the meeting in her absence.

DSHS/Children’s Administration Updates

Extended Foster Care Implementation

Mr. David Del Villar Fox of Children’s Administration (CA) reported that last week CA updated Representative Mary Helen Roberts on current implementation activities of bill SB 5405, which went into effect July 28, 2013. He said it is still unknown how many youth will be served and how well youth are provided information. CA plans a count of youth in extended foster care in October to get an idea of the impact of SB 5405. All staff have had training, but not everyone is completely up to date. He explained that SB 5405 requires a report from JRA and CA to the appropriate legislative committees and the Governor’s Office, with recommendations regarding the needs of dependent youth in JRA institutions that qualify for extended foster care services. They held a public meeting in August, with a lot of JRA youth in attendance. He said the youth were very clear on what they needed and what they thought worked while in institutions and afterwards. A report should be coming out soon.

Family Assessment Response (FAR) Program

Asst. Secretary Strus reported that they are on track to implement the Family Assessment Response (FAR) Program. They have selected three cities to begin implementation: Aberdeen, Lynnwood, and two zip codes in Spokane. They are deciding how offices will do the next part of the implementation. They received partial funding from the Legislature and are debating if they will ask for the remainder.

Asst. Secretary Strus said the tribes have been included in discussions on FAR and they can decide whether or not to participate. Ms. Chorisia Folkman said she thinks participation will depend on each tribe and how they work with DSHS.

Ms. Joanne Moore asked about placements once the program gets started. Asst. Secretary Strus said that while some states have seen a decrease in foster care placements, we should not expect decreases right away, but hopefully in the long run. Asst. Secretary Strus wants to measure which cases are put in the FAR track to ensure they are appropriate, and that there is not a disproportionate number of children of color being referred to the CPS track.

Judge van Doorninck asked how they chose the offices for FAR. Asst. Secretary Strus said each regional administrator chose four offices in their regions based upon certain criteria. A readiness assessment was developed by CA staff, and then a quantitative tool was developed. Leadership made the final call based on information presented to them.

Permanency Push

Asst. Secretary Strus reported that CA currently has 1,662 legally-free kids in the system, so there is a permanency push to get these kids adopted and out of the system. A number of those kids are in their permanent homes right now, and for them it’s a matter of doing the paperwork. The Department has hired temporary FTE’s for six months to help complete the necessary paperwork.

She also said that adoptions have dropped this year by about 40 percent, due to a variety of factors. One reason is that home studies are now done by the Department of Licensed Resources (DLR) instead of the Division of Children and Family Services (DCFS). DCFS did three or four a month, whereas DLR was doing about one and half a month. Randy Hart brought a couple staff from DCFS into DLR to manage this problem, and adoptions have since gone back up. She said on the west side of the state, DLR is now doing four or five filings a month.

Mr. Del Villar Fox added that Casey Family and Treehouse have helped CA put out a document to address some misperceptions of CA social workers, CASA workers, courts, and their partners. He said in King County there has been a spike in cases where foster parents are advised not to adopt because they will lose education benefits, which is not true. When completed, this document will be widely circulated.

AGO Recruitment and Retention Issue

Asst. Secretary Strus reported that the Attorney General’s Office (AGO) has been having a terrible time recruiting and retaining attorneys because their salaries are about 25 percent lower than their counterparts in comparable positions. To deal with this, the AGO was instructed to not fill vacant positions, in order to give some attorneys small raises for retention purposes. Because of poor retention, CA’s ability to do termination cases is negatively impacted. CA and Attorney General Bob Ferguson agreed that the AGO would try to deploy staff in a way to deal with the current and impending backlog from CA before asking for additional money.

Ms. Carrie Wayno added that as seasoned attorneys retire or find jobs with better pay, the AGO becomes much less efficient. The AGO will work individually with legislators, and the Legislature in the next session to get vacancies filled and bring salaries up to speed. She said effective September 1^st, some raises were given with the goal to get attorney salaries 30 percent closer to what their public sector counterparts make.

Ms. Wayno said it’s at a crisis point for them. Asst. Secretary Strus sees the solution as a concerted effort between the AGO, CA, and the judges who are impacted. Judge van Doorninck expressed willingness to help and discussed the impact in Pierce County.

Upcoming Meetings

David Del Villar Fox reminded members of the following upcoming meetings:

1. September 17: Title IV-E Advisory Committee meeting at AOC SeaTac Office, 1:30 - 4:30 p.m.

2. September 30: Community meeting, re: HB 1774 Implementation (measurements for childhood safety & well-being) at AOC SeaTac Office.

3. October 2: Community meeting, Spokane, 10:30 a.m. - 12:30 p.m.

4. October 14: Performance Based Contracting Roundtable meeting

Discuss 2013 Youth & Leadership Summit Recommendations

Asst. Secretary Strus reviewed the proposed recommendations made by the Mockingbird youth at the Summit and discussed where CA is with each of them as follows:

1. Yakima Chapter (Extended Foster Care): CA is looking at the cost of extended foster care for the remaining population. The cost, particularly for youth with medical conditions, could be high.

2. Spokane Chapter and Everett Chapter (Prudent Parent Standard): CA sees this as a great recommendation; the only issue is the liability to both CA and the foster parents. If the liability language can be dealt with and the proper protection for both CA and foster parents is there, CA would have no issue with it at all.

3. Seattle Chapter (Psychotropic Medication): Asst. Secretary Strus says it has been a fight the last few years to fund the Foster Care Assessment Program (FCAP), let alone expand it. There is a workgroup working on psychotropic medications in foster care. This is a federal priority and that workgroup presented at the National Listening Tour of the Congressional Caucus on Foster Youth.

4. Tacoma Chapter (Educational Continuity): Statutes currently require that kids are kept within their original school district. CA has a crisis with foster care placements, especially in King County. Due to the shortage of foster homes, it may not be possible for a youth to change placements and stay in the same district.

5. Olympia Chapter (Permanency Pact): CA is currently working on most or all of these items internally.

Asst. Secretary Strus said they are all good recommendations.

Presentation on Family Time/Visitation Guidelines

Ms. Kelly Warner-King provided members with a draft copy of the Washington State Family Time/Visitation Guidance for Young Children (Birth – 5 Years) in Out of Home Care, and gave the background of how this work got started. She said in August 2012, as part of a series of educational sessions, there was a meeting of 33 local state leaders to talk about ways to explore system-level collaboration to better meet the needs of at-risk children. Meeting participants decided to create guidelines that contained suggestions for the amount of time, frequency of visitation, and in-person contact needed for supporting bonding and attachment between biological parent and child.

The workgroup created combined brain science research, innovative work going on in Washington State, parenting and family time guidelines from other states, and the Washington State Social Workers’ Practice Guide. They put it all together, along with Washington State policies, practices, and procedures, to create a Washington-specific document to help guide decision making on visitation. They are hoping to get the Commission’s endorsement on these guidelines.

Ms. Warner-King answered members’ questions and there was discussion. Asst. Secretary Strus expressed concerns about some of the wording, that some of CA’s concerns may not have been addressed, the impact on CA’s workload, the contents of the Family Time plan, the amount of contact time recommended for visitation in the document, and how it would be financed.

Ms. Carrie Wayno expressed concern about language in the document. It states the “minimum” to be done “in every case,” and that they are asking the Commission to do legislating, which is not the role of the Commission. She said it needs to be clearer what “frequent” means under the statute. She asked if there was a way to narrow the focus on what the Commission’s role is.

Asst. Secretary Strus added that there are impacts to social workers, and it’s disruptive to the kids and foster parents dealing with the aftermath of it. Mr. Mike Canfield said it’s good for the foster parents to know what “ideal” is, but that foster care homes are already overburdened and this might negatively impact them.

Judge van Doorninck said she agreed with Ms. Wayno regarding the Commission’s role and expressed concerns about the funding. Ms. Joanne Moore suggested that this could be more of a guidance piece right now, and not a directive. Asst. Secretary Strus asked about funding in other states, and Ms. Warner-King talked about alternatives to supervised visitation. Judge van Doorninck talked about looking for other entities that could help with supervised visitation and/or other creative alternatives. It was suggested that “unsupervised visits” be the default, but Judge van Doorninck and Asst. Secretary Strus agreed unsupervised visits should not be given for infants. Ms. Moore suggested it is a perfect court project to pull together community resources for supervised visitation, and there was discussion about how Pierce County, King County, and others are working on this.

Ms. Chorisia Folkman said this is similar to when the Commission looked at the recommendations for standards of representation for counsel of children. This was helpful for the community, but wasn’t law, and that perhaps this could serve in the same way. Ms. Warner-King said they have talked to CITA about posting it as a resource for judicial officers and other legal practitioners, to provide guidelines around what is developmentally appropriate for this age group, see what is being done in other places, etc. Ms. Lippold suggested that this document be adopted as “ideal” guidelines for family time. If it is contingent on availability of community resources, people could advocate for those funds. Ms. Wayno recommended some language changes, plus specifying time up front. It was suggested that everyone thinks it’s great as an aspirational document, but the concern is having a mandate.

Motion was made by Ms. Moore that this document be revised with the suggested edits, and that the Commission reconsider it at their December meeting. Motion was seconded by Judge van Doorninck.
Ms. Wayno will make the initial edits, and then distribute it to other Commission members for their changes. The Commission will then get the edited document back to Ms. Warner-King by early November before the next Commission meeting. Ms. Warner-King will then consult with the working group about the changes, and present the revised document to the Commission for reconsideration at the December 16, 2013, Commission meeting. The motion passed unanimously.

Asst. Secretary Strus mentioned that if this document goes out to judges then many may order it, and she is concerned about the fiscal impacts to and expectations on CA. She also asked about visitation centers, and there was group discussion about visitation centers and home visiting programs. Ms. Warner-King will look into the research on visitation centers and share that with the Commission as well.

Washington Tribal-State Judicial Consortium

Ms. Bricker reported there will be a tribal-state court meeting on September 23, at the Annual Judicial Conference in Wenatchee. There will be sessions on “Indian Welfare Post Baby Veronica” and “Emerging Issues of Nations in Transition.” They will discuss the Violence Against Women Act, PL-280 (regarding funding of law enforcement on tribal lands), and the Tribal Law and Order Act. Participants will discuss how to work together, including discussing issues to see if they want to form a consortium, what it would look like, and what other players should be participating. Letters of invitation were sent to each of the tribal courts, as well as to the Supreme Court, superior court, district court, and municipal court judges’ listservs.

They are also working on a guidebook that can be used in the tribal and state courts, which discusses the different laws that govern the two types of courts. It will include a chapter on how tribal courts work for each tribe, and how the state courts work. There will be a section on ongoing communication, as well as a map showing how the different counties and tribal lands overlay, a list of acronyms, glossary, etc.

Ms. Wayno mentioned an appellate case pending in the Court of Appeals, Division II, in Re the Dependency of E.B.VP., E.T.P., and W.S.P, relating to tribal-state jurisdiction over children who are domiciled on the Nisqually Tribe reservation in Thurston County. She explained how it is challenging our assumptions and said it’s a decision the consortium may want to consider.

Approval of May 20, 2013, Meeting Minutes and June 26, 2013, Summit Minutes

Ms. Joanne Moore presented the meeting minutes from the May 20, 2013, Commission meeting. Motion to approve the minutes as written was made by Judge van Doorninck. Motion was seconded by
Ms. Wayno. The May 20, 2013, meeting minutes were unanimously approved as written.

Ms. Joanne Moore presented the meeting minutes from the June 26, 2013, Mockingbird Foster Youth and Alumni Leadership Summit. Motion to approve the minutes as written was made by Judge van Doorninck. Motion was seconded by Ms. Wayno. The June 26, 2013, meeting minutes were unanimously approved as written.

Workgroup/Oversight Reports

Normalcy Workgroup

Ms. Jeannie Kee provided members with a copy of a Memorandum dated September 9, 2013, from the Normalcy Workgroup. She reported that the workgroup hopes to continue collaborating with Mockingbird and pushing for the “Prudent Parent Standard.” Second, the workgroup has made recommendations to update CA’s “Guidelines for Foster Child Activities”. DLR also asked the workgroup to help with a section on financial literacy. Third, the memorandum includes their “Know Before You Say No” myth buster document that they hope CA will add to their documents. Ms. Kee reiterated that the purpose of the myth buster is to clarify the myths in the foster care system. The language in one of the myths on Page 5 of the document will be updated due to recent changes pertaining to sibling visits.

The workgroup wants to look into individual development accounts (IDA), where banks do a matching savings program with youth in care. They want to let foster parents know those accounts exist, as well as that credit unions offer free trainings for youth ages five and up.

They also want to create something for the extended foster care population. The group is moving towards a teen success agreement checklist to ensure youth 13-21 are participating in normal activities.

WA-QIC Update

Ms. Hathaway Burden provided a WA-QIC update. She said they are closing in on a year and half of data collection and are approaching the halfway point of the study. She reported they currently have a 97 percent response rate, and they hope to keep that momentum going into the next year and a half.

Ms. Burden said their only potential barrier is the reorganization of the King County Public Defense Agency. A lot of the participating attorneys are in those agencies. They are now county employees, and there are restrictions on county employees receiving additional money. If they cannot issue incentive payment checks, they hope to find other creative solutions because they can’t afford to lose county attorneys since they are already working with almost every attorney in the state who has done dependency work. They hope to have a solution to maintain all these attorneys by December.

Old Business

Child Maltreatment and Domestic Violence Proposals

Ms. McLean reminded members that at the last Commission meeting Justice Bridge presented three possible proposals for projects that the Commission could work towards together with the Gender and Justice Commission. She said Justice Bridge has been brainstorming and will present a full proposal to the Commission at the next meeting. More information will be available in December.

Foster Care Transitions Workgroup

There is nothing new to report at this time. This item will remain on the agenda for the next meeting.

New Business

2014 Legislative Agenda Items

Ms. Laurie Lippold, Partners for Our Children, discussed the number of initiatives that Children’s Administration (CA) is implementing now. While the revenue forecast is better than in previous years, money is still an issue and 2014 is a short session, so they are trying to be realistic.

She said the Child Welfare Advocacy Coalition is in the process of identifying their priorities, which tend to be in the areas of keeping kids out of care, improving the system for children and families involved, achieving permanency more quickly, and ensuring successful transition into adulthood. She said, within the realm of child welfare, there are several items that people are talking about, including:

1. The Youth Summit: “Prudent Parent Standard.” CA is currently looking at whether or not they can implement it without any statutory change. Liability protection issues and ways to potentially address those are also being looked at.

2. Legal Representation for Dependent Youth. There was a stakeholder meeting, and there is a work session coming up in October. There will likely be some decisions made about how to advance on legal representation. There may be an evaluation asking: what was the goal (shorter time to permanency, increased reunification, fewer placements, etc.), and was that accomplished?

3. Extended Foster Care & Moving Ahead with the Two Remaining Groups. There’s a lot of discussion about either holding off or moving ahead with the two remaining groups of kids: (1) working 80+ hours a month, and (2) having a medical condition that keep them from participating in other ways.

4. Psychotropic Medication & Foster Kids Who are on Multiple Psychotropic Medications. There may be more that can be done, and there could be more legislation around that.

5. Family Assessment Response (FAR). Many people would be interested in continued implementation of FAR, either for reducing caseload sizes or services.

6. Areas Around Child Welfare & Early Learning. There are discussions around linking child welfare of kids with appropriate early learning programs like Head Start, ECEAP, or Early Head Start. There may also be some need for legislation to actually change the definition.

7. Visitation for Family Time.

There was group discussion. Ms. Lippold said the background check piece also passed. She said the details still need to be determined, but there is a group who is spearheading those recommendations. They will then go back to the Legislature, and if it looks like something that needs to be done statutorily, they will recommend that. She said there is another group who is looking at some of the issues surrounding background checks and ongoing concerns about whether it’s the secretary’s list or portability of background checks.

Mr. Mike Canfield talked about a prospective foster parent who is held up because of something that happened when she was 13 years old. He said the Foster Parents Association of Washington State (FPAWS) is working on getting the word “unfounded” removed from CPS case files. They want to get the word “inconclusive” back in, instead of “unfounded.”

Commission Meeting Dates for 2014

Ms. Jessica Birklid presented the possible Commission meeting dates for 2014. They are as follows:

· March 10th or 17th

· May 12th or 19th

· September 15th or 22nd

· December 8th

Members were asked if they have any issues with these dates. Judge van Doorninck said the September 22^nd date conflicts with the Washington State Annual Judge’s Conference.

Next Meetings

The next quarterly meeting is on December 16, 2013, at the Temple of Justice, Chief Justice’s Reception Room.

There being no further business, Ms. Joanne Moore adjourned the meeting.

Respectfully submitted,

Susan Peterson, AOC

Pattern Jury Instructions

Privacy and Disclaimer Notices Sitemap