8.5.1 Concurrent Planning | 8.5.2 Expedited Termination | 8.5.3 Child and Family Teams | 8.5.4 Decision-Making Process | 8.5.5 Engagement of the Kinship Network
In earlier sections of this best practice guide references to concurrent planning, expedited terminations and the use of Child and Family Teams were made. In Kinship care, these same key practices continue to be relevant and the same urgency for achieving permanency exists. These key practices need to be considered in the context of kinship care.
Concurrent planning is to be practiced in every DCFS case. In permanency risk cases, (see Definition and Principles of Permanency Planning section) the caseworker must work with the child's parents while simultaneously pursuing permanency with relative caregivers and others. The comprehensive family service plan for permanency risk cases should detail how the kinship network will expedite permanency and who will be the placement and permanency resource for the child.
The concept of concurrent planning on every case is relevant to children residing with relative caregivers. Full disclosure of the needs and statutory requirements of the child welfare system is required. The permanency issues that affect the child in care must be fully discussed and understood by the parent and the caregiver. If the kinship network understands what the formal child welfare system needs, the likelihood of compliance will increase. Full disclosure sets the stage for ownership of the solutions by the parents, the relative caregiver and the larger kinship network.
Concurrent planning in its simplest form requires the worker to develop an alternative permanency plan for children in care should they not be able to return home. This should be discussed with caregivers and their involvement in these decisions should be sought. The strength of the kinship network is their insight into their family and how it functions. Use of their expertise, knowledge and influence can facilitate permanency for children, whether the permanency goal is return home, adoption, guardianship or independence. This expertise is available but the worker must develop skills in accessing it. Once again supporting and encouraging the kinship network - not supplanting it - is a more effective method of practice.
Expedited termination cases are those which require, because of the parent's conduct or behavior towards the child, immediate consideration of termination of parental rights. Cases which fit this criteria are listed earlier in this guide. The kinship network in these cases can be an integral and vital part of the service planning and service delivery process so that permanency can be achieved. Even though the parents' rights may be terminated, the kinship network - if capable of meeting the child's needs for safety, well-being and permanency - may in fact be the primary placement resource.
Child and Family Teams are also a key practice for Department staff. These teams, which are multi-disciplinary in nature, involve the family, professionals, paraprofessionals, caregivers and other formal and informal supports that the family and children can utilize.
The identification and involvement of the kinship network as participants in the Child and Family Team can give the worker an early advantage in pursuing permanency. Relative supports and connections tend to be in place and are working alliances that can be used. Using this already built network early in the assessment and intervention process may in fact get services, assessments, and progress started earlier than in those situations where networks and supports have to be created and located. The earlier assessment begins and services start, the sooner progress can be evaluated and viable permanency decisions can be made. This is especially important when one considers the expedited timeframes outlined in this guide and in the law.
Note that the above discussion revolves around adopting a broader view of family. While a worker may begin their interventions and assessments with the birth parent and the relative caregiver other relatives and non-relatives who are significant to the family should be identified and assessed. Thus older siblings, aunts, uncles, grandparents, great grandparents, godparents, family friends can all provide important services and supports which can facilitate permanency, well-being and safety. Only through a fully inclusive and open process can these resources be identified and utilized.
Opening the decision making process to those in the kinship and family network is required if timely permanency is to be achieved. There is an expected level of collaboration and an inclusiveness that needs to be fostered as the worker engages with the parents and the kinship network. While actual decisions and recommendations rest within the formal child welfare system (supervisor, court, etc.), these should be made in conjunction with the parents and kinship network. These decisions should be based on participant performance and actual behavior - and should never compromise the child's safety, well-being and permanence. Workers, whenever possible, should be making decisions with family and not for them.
There is nothing in the casework practice section of this guide that is incompatible with working with the kinship network. The primary modification that is being proposed is that engagement, assessment, service planning, family meetings and visitation should be done in connection and conjunction with the kinship network. Adopting a broader definition of family for purposes of delivering casework services is both effective and efficient.
The preliminary task for the worker is engaging the family. The engagement tips and techniques listed previously are useful in developing the relationship between the client and worker. In working with the parent and the kinship network there are some specific additional engagement tips which might prove helpful.
· Recognize that not only the parent but the caregiver and kinship network are new participants in the child welfare and juvenile court system. Take the time to fully explain how these systems work and answer any questions that may be asked.
· Respect the pace at which the parent and kinship network move. Intervention is a traumatic time and the family may need time to process what is happening. Don't rush discussion and be sure to convey the importance of each and every contact.
· Workers must recognize the differences between the formal and the informal components involved in the family's interaction with the child welfare system. Acknowledging these and discussing them fully may facilitate engagement and avoid future problems and barriers.
· Recognize the value of the kinship network and value their expertise on the family history, family functioning and decision-making abilities.
· Look for and recognize kinship network strengths; work together to determine how these strengths can be used to provide for the child's safety, well-being and permanency.
· Strive to identify and understand the cultural context in which the family operates.
· Demonstrate sensitivity and empathy to the crisis and pain that family members may be experiencing.
· From the initial contact with the parents, caregivers and larger network, look for ways to empower the network especially as it pertains to permanency, well-being and safety.
· Recognize there is often a stigma or a sense of failure that is present when the Department is involved in a case. Be sensitive about this and reassure the parties that this is difficult and that the most important task is assuring the safety, well-being and permanency for the children.
The above points when used with the general engagement techniques will facilitate the interaction and engagement with the family.
Gleeson and Bonecutter suggest that several characteristics are important to consider in evaluating and intervening in social networks.
Workers should utilize the following points as they proceed with their assessment and interventions of kinship networks:
· Size: The number of family members and others involved in the care of the child are important considerations. Assessment of the size of the network and the quality of the various relationships is essential.
· Helpfulness: As in any family system there are people who can be counted on to meet others' needs. Others indicate a willingness to help but are never available. The assessment should identify those in the network who are willing to assist and help.
· Intensity: This refers to the amount of contact and the "degree of involvement" with the child and family that relatives and other family helpers can commit to. Assessment needs to identify those who are interested and involved and willing to positively work to resolve problems.
· Durability: This refers to the amount of time that this network or family system has been in existence. This can be a positive assessment point if the network remains interested and capable of providing support or a negative point if the network is no longer interested in helping the member.
· Accessibility: Refers to the physical location of various family members and their openness in terms of time and energy. Geographic proximity of family members and the energy they have to participate in planning and providing assistance is a major area to assess.
· Reciprocity: Members of social networks - including families - are usually involved in some "give and take." Members tend to provide and receive emotional and physical support from each other. In healthy systems there is a balance among its members. A key assessment area is to determine what balance and imbalance exists and work with the system to restore balance.
Additional factors that must be considered should focus on the relative caregiver's ability to:
· Protect the child from the parent or other caregiver that placed the child at risk and have the ability to establish boundaries between the child and parent. It is imperative that the prospective caregiver recognizes the harm and/or risk that the child has experienced and be willing to abide by the safety plan that has been developed. The fact that a caregiver is a relative should not undermine the basic need that the child must be protected from further harm and/or risk. It is very clearly the caregiver's role to protect the child and if there is any doubt as to their ability to do this than the placement should not be made.
· Insure that there is an absence of intergenerational abuse. Certain forms of child abuse and neglect may have intergenerational components. In these instances it is important, via the assessment process, to determine if the abuse or neglect which occurred might also be repeated while the child is in the care of the relatives. CANTS, LEADS and the genogram, together with the overall assessment, are tools that can identify risk factors which might exist in a placement.
· Determine if the relative caregiver can meet or potentially meet the child's permanency needs. This is a complicated and very sensitive subject in kinship care and often relatives need to reconcile their definition of permanency with that of the child welfare worker.
· Determine if the relative caregiver has the capacity or the potential to meet the everyday well-being issues that the child has. This consists of the child's basic needs for food, clothing, shelter, supervision, routine medical care and basic education.
· Determine if the relative can meet the child's emotional needs.
· Determine if the relative can meet or has the potential to meet any special needs that the child may have including special medical, developmental, educational and behavioral needs.
· Determine if the relative can be a cooperative resource with the child welfare worker in providing services to the child and when appropriate, the parent.
8.5.1 Concurrent Planning | 8.5.2 Expedited Termination | 8.5.3 Child and Family Teams | 8.5.4 Decision-Making Process | 8.5.5 Engagement of the Kinship Network