Upload
emmeline-skinner
View
216
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Increasing Disability Competence in Child Protection Professionals
Elizabeth Lightfoot, Ph.D.Traci L. LaLiberte, MSW
School of Social WorkUniversity of Minnesota
Curriculum ModuleCenter for Advanced Studies in Child Welfare
Funded in part by the Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station and Title IV-E
Citation: Lightfoot, E. & LaLiberte, T. (2004). Increasing disability competence in child protection professionals: A Curriculum Module. Center for Advanced Studies in Child Welfare, School of Social Work, University of Minnesota website: http://ssw.che.umn.edu/cascw.html
Introduction
– Discuss prevalence of people with disabilities in the child welfare system
– Present initial findings of Minnesota survey of approaches to ‘cases’ involving people with disabilities
– Proposes disability competent child protection services
Prevalence of People with Disabilities in Child Protection System
No Federal Reporting Requirements
Uneven State Reporting Requirements
No Standard Definition of “Disability”
Prevalence of Children with Disabilities who are ‘abused’ or ‘neglected’
Incidence of abuse & neglect of children with disabilities is 1.7 to 1.9 times that of children w/o disabilities – National Center on Child Abuse & Neglect (Crosse
et al., 1993)
Survey of ‘maltreated children’ found 64% of maltreated children had a disability– Comprehensive Survey at an Omaha
Hospital(Sullivan, 1997)
Prevalence of Abuse or Neglect by Parents with Disabilities
We Know Even Less!– More adults with disabilities having children
– Suggestions that 40-60% of parents with a developmental disability have their children removed at some point
• Booth & Booth, 1998
Current Study: Research Question What policies, plans and/or procedures
do county child protection agencies follow to address the needs of children and family members with disabilities?
Current Study: Site
Minnesota County Child Protection Agencies– 87 Total Counties– 84 CPS Administrative
Counties
State Supervised/ County Administered
Current Study: Site
Minnesota Counties
Largest: Hennepin, 1,130,880
Smallest: Traverse, 3,965
40 counties: Under 20,000
8 counties: Over 100,000
Current Study: Site
Four Groupings of Counties– Large City; Metropolitan
Counties– Metropolitan Counties– Out-State Metropolitan
Counties– Rural Counties
Current Study: Methodology Telephone Survey
– Telephone Survey with CPS administrators or their agents during Winter 2002-2003
– 75 of 84 counties participated• 89% Response Rate
– Brief, semi-structured interview
– 12 minutes to 50 minutes
Current Study: Methodology (Cont.)
Telephone Survey Topics– Policies and procedures for working with
clients with disabilities– Best practices– Barriers to providing services and needs
for improvement
Written Policies for People with Disabilities?
Only 5 counties (6.7%) report having written policy related to child protection procedures for cases involving people with disabilities
30 counties (40%) report having county accommodation policies
40 counties (53.3%) report having no knowledge of county or CPS disability policies
Types of Case Management Processes Dual Case Assignment Specialty CPS Workers CPS Workers
w/Disability Experience Self Select Cases Team-Information
Consultation Team-Active
Consultation Team/Consult with
Outside Consultants Screen/Team All Cases Regularly Scheduled
Teaming Opportunities All Generalist Workers
Training MN Core CPS Training Research Disabilities
(Internet) Assess for Safety
Incorporating Disability Components
Check Other Counties for History
Screen for the Presence of a Disability
Make a New Referral to County Disability Worker
Case Management Approaches
2
9
5
39
1
2
3
13
1
7
2
26
0 10 20 30 40 50
Self SelectCases
CPS Workerw/ Experience
SpecialtyWorker
Dual Assign
RuralNon-RuralTotal
Case Management Approaches
1
9
10
31
12
53
0
3
1
6
3
15
1
6
9
25
9
38
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Generalist Workers
Regularly Scheduled Teams
Screen ALL Cases
Outside Consultation
Team/Active
Team/Info
RuralNon-RuralTotal
Case Management Approaches
15
6
2
9
11
23
4
2
1
3
2
8
11
4
1
6
9
15
0 5 10 15 20 25
Refer to Disability worker
Screen for Disability
Check History
Assess for Safety w/ Disability
MN Core Training
Training
RuralNon-RuralTotal
Barriers - Overall
Lack of providers 38.7%
Rural county 32.0%
Lack of funding/resources 30.7%
Driving Distance 21.3%
Transportation 21.0%
Lack of specialized providers/services
20.0%
Systems Conflicts 20.0%
Barriers - OverallLack of disability knowledge by professionals related to and including CPS
18.7%
Too few people with disabilities 16.0%
Making Accommodations 13.3%
The time these cases take 10.7%
Legislation/ASFA placement timeframes
10.7%
Lack of specialization by CPS 9.3%
Barriers, Non-RuralLack of resources/funding 40%
Systems conflicts 30%
Lack of disability knowledge by CPS and other professionals
25%
Legislation/ASFA placement timeframes 20%
Time these cases take 20%
Lack of training 15%
Waiting lists for providers 15%
Lack of providers 15%
Barriers, Rural IssuesLack of Providers 47.3%
Rural County 41.8%
Lack of Resources/Funding 27.3%
Driving Distance 25.5%
Lack of Specialized providers/services 25.5%
Too few people with disabilities 20.0%
Transportation 25.5%
Systems Conflicts 16.4%
Lack of disability knowledge by CPS and other professionals
16.4%
Lack of specialization by CPS 12.7%
CPS Best Practices-OverallAccessing and coordinating services 40.0%
Individualizing and tailoring services 32.0%
Creativity and Innovation 25.3%
Collaborate well (Dual Workers) 25.3%
Good relationship with client and families 17.3%
Small agency so we know each other well 14.7%
Well-developed services 10.7%
Community Involvement 9.3%
Good assessments 8.0%
Respecting people with disabilities 8.0%
CPS Best Practices, Non-Rural
Accessing and coordinating services 45%
Collaborate well (Dual Workers) 35%
Creativity and Innovation 20%
Community Involvement 15%
Holistic approach 15%
Good relationship with client and families
15%
Well developed services 15%
CPS Best Practices, RuralIndividualizing and tailoring services 40.0%
Accessing and coordinating services 38.2%
Creativity and Innovation 27.3%
Collaborate well (Dual Workers) 21.8%
Small agency so we know each other well 18.2%
Good relationship with client and families 18.2%
Assessments 9.1%
Respecting people with disabilities 9.1%
Well developed services 9.1%
Strengths-based approach 9.1%
Communication with providers and professionals
9.1%
Case Examples: A Rural County: Northwoods Case Approach
– Team Information Consult (informally)– Internet Research
Barriers– Lack of Providers– Lack of Funding– Transportation– Too Few Child Psychiatrists/Psychologists
Strengths– Small Agency So We Know Each Other Well– Individualize and tailor services
Case Examples: An Out-State Metropolitan County: Pleasant Lake Case Approach
– Dual Case Assignment (for DD and MH)– Active Consultation– Team Outside
Barriers– Lack of Providers– Lack of Disability Knowledge – Lack of Funding
Strengths– Collaborate well (Dual Workers)– Respect People with Disabilities– Creativity and Innovation
Case Examples: A Metropolitan County: Humphrey Case Approach
– Specialty Workers– Screen for the Presence of a Disability or Current Worker
Barriers– Lack of Funding– Waiting Lists– High Staff Turnover
Strengths– Caseload Size– Accessing Resources– Understanding Disabilities
Cases that Result in Most Difficulties for CPS Workers People that fall through the cracks
– People that just barely don’t qualify for DD Services
– People with Hidden Disabilities– People with Low Incidence Disabilities
Implications for SW Education All SW graduates should be disability competent
Social work students need skills in collaboration and inter-disciplinary teaming
Social work students need information on navigating complex systems
Continuing education on disabilities for social workers and other professionals involved in child protection must be developed