UnivIANICWA4 17 07BRjkr

Are We Making a Difference? Listening to Native Families and Community Stakeholders : 

Are We Making a Difference? Listening to Native Families and Community Stakeholders University of Iowa School of Social Work Nat’l Resource Ctr. for Family Centered Practice Iowa City, IA 52242 Presenters: Brad Richardson, Research Director Julia Kleinschmit-Rembert, Clinical Faculty Jeri Gordon, Research Associate & Iowa Department of Human Services Presenter: Pat Penning, Service Area Manager

The National Resource Center for Family Centered Practice : 

The National Resource Center for Family Centered Practice Established in 1977 as a national consulting division of the University of Iowa School of Social Work Research, Evaluation, Technical Assistance, Training & Organizational Development NRC specializes in research-supported, strength-based culturally competent family centered practice; “Dr. Outcomes” Family Development Specialist Certification Program

Research & Evaluation Division: 

Research & Evaluation Division DMC Resource Center & Minority Youth & Families Initiative

Jumping the Gap: 

Jumping the Gap Research Training Meetings Pilot projects Test protocols Families getting what they need, when they need it Flexible access to community resources Systems Change Fear Defensiveness Hidden assumptions Formal structures Tyranny of habit (Adapted from John Franz, Sr. Juvenile Justice Advisor, Nat’l Resource Network)

Woodbury County (Sioux City) Iowa: 

Woodbury County (Sioux City) Iowa Native American = 0.4% of the population Native American children = 2.2% in foster care History of community activism/need for change Community Initiative for Native Families and Children (CINCF): 2001-present Memorial March for Lost Children: 2002-2006 Passage of Iowa ICWA - 2005

Tribal Affiliations/Enrollments of Native Children Assessed for Abuse, Woodbury County January 2005-December 2006: 

Alaska Assiniboine Cherokee Cheyenne River Sioux Chippewa Crow Creek Sioux Fort Peck Sioux Ho-Chunk of WI Hopi Mille Lacs Mississippi Choctaw Navajo Northern Cheyenne Oglala Sioux Omaha Ponca Pottawattamie Rosebud Sioux Santee Sioux Sisseton Sioux Spirit Lake Sioux Tanana Chief Turtle Mt. Chippewa Yankton Sioux Wahpeton Sioux Winnebago of NE Tribal Affiliations/Enrollments of Native Children Assessed for Abuse, Woodbury County January 2005-December 2006

Minority Youth and Family Initiative (MYFI): 2004 to present: 

Minority Youth and Family Initiative (MYFI): 2004 to present Broken Trust by Stanley Wanlass Reduce disproportionality of Native Americans and African Americans in child welfare In Sioux City, planning involves multiple systems and stakeholders, especially Native American community and Tribal members Trust, communication, and relationship issues among IDHS, courts, families, Tribes, and Native community

MYFI Goal Statement: 

MYFI Goal Statement Increases in: Relative placements, Reunification with parents, Increase of Native American foster homes Decreases in: Termination of Parental Rights Reabuse/neglect rates Entry into the foster care system Abuse/neglect rates overall Number of placements for Native children Native American children are safely raised in the Native community as evidenced by:

Areas of Primary Focus: 

Areas of Primary Focus Provision of culturally competent services Use of family team meetings Increase of Native children placed with relatives (including Tribal transfer) and Increase in Native children placed in Native foster homes. - Photo by National Geographic

MYFI Tools: 

MYFI Tools SNAP Team: Special Native American Project Team Emphasis on Relative/Community/Tribal Networks Flexible resource dollar pool New approaches to recruiting Native foster parents Helping non-Native foster and adoptive parents become more culturally competent

First Year Outcomes: 2005: 

First Year Outcomes: 2005 North Carolina Family Assessment Scale (NCFAS) showed improvement in family functioning domains Colorado Family Risk Assessment and Reassessment (CFRA and CFRR) showed Decrease in High and Moderate Risk Increase in Low Risk Other methods: Treatment Activity Reporting Form, some interviewing, project monitoring

NCFAS Results: 

NCFAS Results +2 = clear strength +1 = mild strength 0 = baseline/ Adequate -1 = mild problem -2 = moderate problem -3 = serious problem.

CFRA and CFRR: 

CFRA and CFRR 24 Family Assessments CFRA: 1 Low risk 9 Moderate risk 13 High risk CFRR: 9 Low risk 6 Moderate risk 8 High risk

What other information do we need?: 

What other information do we need? Family perspectives Provider and worker perspectives Community perceptions

Provider Responses: 

Provider Responses Interviews conducted with: Members of SNAP Judicial System: Judge, Guardian Ad Litem, Assistant County Attorney, Court Administrator Tribal Child Welfare Workers Community Advocates In-Home Service Providers Others

Provider Questions: Changes. . .: 

Provider Questions: Changes. . . Q1: Over the past year, what do you think has changed about the way DHS serves Native American families involved with child welfare? Q2: How has your agency’s relationship with DHS changed? Q3: How do you feel about the changes over the past year?

Provider Questions: Overrepresentation: 

Provider Questions: Overrepresentation Q4: Do you think these changes will affect over-representation in Woodbury County? Q5: What do you think the percentage of Native Americans in child welfare should be? Graphic from the Nawash Native child welfare program for the Neyaashiinigmiing Community

Provider Questions: Strengths, Improvements Needed : 

Provider Questions: Strengths, Improvements Needed Q6: What are the unique strengths in the service system? Q7: What would you like to see done differently? Photo by Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska

Provider Questions: Family Team Meetings and Native American Workers: 

Provider Questions: Family Team Meetings and Native American Workers Q8: How do you think using Family Team Meetings impacts service outcomes for families? Q9: What difference do you think having Native American workers makes in working with Native families? www.redheadedartist.com

Slide22: 

Better relationships between DHS the Native American Community and individual families, increased resources, and focus on prevention of out of home placement. Improvement in communication. Optimistic about longer term systems change, but concerned about sustainability; a sense from some that these changes are long overdue.

Slide23: 

“They are consulting with the Tribes where they hadn’t done that in the past. There has been a dramatic change for the positive. They have the Tribe involved in decision making and working as a team instead of being in left and right field. If the Woodbury County Attorney would get on the team, things would be even better.” Tribal Child Welfare Worker “DHS is more receptive to trying new services . . . A year or two ago, sending families to Flowering Tribe (substance abuse treatment for Oglalla Sioux women with children) would have been unheard of and now it’s considered part of a service option menu.” Guardian Ad Litem “There is more focus on prevention – getting calls from families when problems are small. . . DHS has been getting a better reputation for being helpful rather than punitive – this is a shift happening over time, but it is happening.” DHS CPS Worker

Slide24: 

“Money frustrates me because I know it won’t always be there and there will be backlash when it’s gone. “You paid for it before and now you don’t!” . . . we will regress to where we were before in terms of caseloads, time, funding, etc. – are we always going to have the unit when the state commits to it one year at a time?” DHS worker “I appreciate the changes immensely. I see better services for children. I see the workers making a sincere effort of getting to know the client, and working for the clients and not so much against.” Tribal child welfare worker “. . . We cannot compliment . . . DHS at this point as they are simply doing what is necessary, what (should have been done) before now. One must acknowledge effort . . . It is not a time to throw roses, but a time to talk of issues . . . That will be when every Native American family in this community has a feeling about DHS that is not negative. That will take some time.” Native community advocate

“It already has” (impacted overrepresentation): 

“It already has” (impacted overrepresentation) Image from Canku Oto newsletter: http://www.turtletrack.org/ Varying answers re: what the proportion of Native Children in the child welfare system should be: proportionate to the number of Native people in the population Zero Some concern that numbers would always be disproportionate.

Slide26: 

“The community is seeing action, not just words. Action helps them to deal with all the removals and terminations in the past.” Native community member “I think it already is, because I can tell by clients I have on my caseload that they are with families or in relative placement. There is a real push to use relatives, which should have been true all along . . .” Guardian Ad Litem “We need to try to work with families before they are formal, open cases . . . Once they are in the system, they have a better chance too, because of best practices and because Tribes are notified earlier. In the past it felt like Guardians Ad Litem, DHS, etc. were teamed up against the family and now it feels like the workers are working with families, not against them.” Tribal child welfare worker

Slide27: 

“It should be the same proportionality as any other race – or less, because of kinship ties that are different and stronger in the Native American community.” DHS worker “The number of Native American kids and families in the system will always be disproportionate because of economics and generational problems we have in the Native American community . . . Our concern is about the lack of process that makes disproportionality as severe as what we’ve seen in Woodbury County” Judge “My position is that families need to stay the heck out of the system. I think families are better served staying out of the system. It limits your freedom and independence.” Native community advocate

Slide28: 

Strengths include engaging clients in a trusting relationship, strengths-based work, and concrete help. Needed improvements: providing a longer commitment to the program, keeping caseloads low, better understanding data, and more Native providers

Slide29: 

“Case workers nowadays don’t judge people by their standards, but the standards of the people. Being in the white society, and I was raised in it, you have very strict standards and that won’t work with Native American people. If they offer you a cup of coffee, take it and be respectful. A lot of little things can work to become positive, and I see that happening.” Tribal child welfare worker “Concrete help they are able to give such as gas cards to get to appointments, WalMart cards to get food and clothes, family team meetings to connect extended family that have been distanced from the situation. All these are strengths in the system.” Court Appointed Special Advocate

Slide30: 

“A five to ten year commitment from the state would send a good message to the Native American community.” Native community advocate “If they want to determine the impact MYFI can make, we need to know our data.” Native community advocate “Caseloads were intended to be low –they’ve gone up because we have ongoing families and redesigning the system (has had an affect).” DHS worker “More Native providers would be helpful . . .” Guardian Ad Litem “Tribal continuity is hard . . . Workers change constantly.” County Attorney

Slide31: 

With Native workers, engagement happens faster, trust is deeper and more natural, but being Native isn’t an absolute requirement for being a good worker. Ronald Lewis, first Native American to earn a doctorate in Social Work If done well, the Family Team Meeting gets families and workers on the same page, identifies family strengths, and builds a workable plan.

Slide32: 

“(In one) it was a yelling, screaming match halfway through, but in the end, the whole family saw what was going on and what needed to be done to get the family back together. It was a large one with lots of people: aunts, uncles, relatives, grandparents. At first they didn’t understand what was happening in the family, and then when they did, they all took a part of that and committed to making this work.” DHS worker “I think they are good because it puts everything out on the table for the family. What is expected, what the responsibilities are, not blaming, finger pointing, but this is our goal; this is what needs to be done for the child to be with the parents. Everyone has the same goal: working together.” Native community advocate

Slide33: 

“ . . . (the Tribal liaison)can get more done with Tribes in 20 minutes than most can do in a month.” DHS worker “I think . . . Native persons can understand better what is going on in the system and they are more comfortable. I get calls daily from Native parents . . . A lot of them are thinking the system is making them do this or that – and I help them understand what they have to do and why, to get their kids back.” Native family liaison “It helps build trust, however . . . (You) can’t generalize that just having a Native American worker will be effective with all the Native American families. . . (We) need to remain sensitive to treating people as individuals." Judge

Listening to Families: 

Listening to Families Referred for: Maltreatment report Issues with children with which they were involved Removal of a child Involvement (time) in system varied Santee Angel – by Rita Tate

Opening Questions: 

Opening Questions Q1: When you first came to DHS, what were you looking for/what did you need? Q2: What services did you think you needed? Q3: What services were recommended? Q4: How much time was there from the time you first met with DHS until you started receiving help?

Questions about service participation, change experienced, and what the families would have done differently. : 

Questions about service participation, change experienced, and what the families would have done differently. Q5: Which services did you participate in? Q6: What changed in your family as a result of your involvement with DHS? Q7: How did these changes come about? Q8: Were there any things you would have liked better, or things you would have liked to be different? Q9: About the way services were identified or chosen?

How did you feel about . . . : 

How did you feel about . . . Q10: What you were able to do? Q11: The level of interest the worker showed toward you and circumstances/toward helping you resolve issues? Q12: What was provided? Q13: Do you think it makes a difference to have workers who are of the same race and ethnicity? Q14: Do you think family team meetings make a difference?

What families were looking for . . . : 

What families were looking for . . . “My girls were removed from our home. We had been staying with a person who was selling drugs. When I went to DHS, I was looking for help to get the girls back home with me.” “To report neglect and abuse in regards to adopted children of my husband. We now have them and were looking for resources to help the children.” “I did not want anything from them.” Native American Woman, redthreaddesigns@aol.com

Needed Services: 

Needed Services “I just wanted my children to stay with me.” “I was looking for someone to help me with my niece so I could get guardianship from the court system.” “I wanted the adoptive mother to be looked at and the children removed and placed with my husband and me.” “At the time, I didn’t think I needed any services.” Mother and child – Christianna Hunnicutt

Recommended Services: 

Recommended Services “DHS recommended that I contact our Tribe and follow the ICWA guidelines. They provided free long distance for us to call the Tribe and Child Protective Services in the county where the children were, and they provided free long distance phone cards, free faxing, transportation to court, and advocated for our family.” “Counseling and an in-home therapist.” “Intensive (substance abuse) outpatient treatment, an in-home worker, and the Unit worker.” Mohawk Woman by Natasha Smoke Santiago

Timeliness: 

Timeliness “After they came to my house and called me, they immediately started a home study for placement.” “ . . .the CPS Worker . . . suggested I call the Native Unit. I was already able to visit with my kids. The Unit came a little later.” “CPS took the kids and I stayed away until they were going to take my parental rights away. I decided to set up the in-patient treatment.” “I started receiving help immediately.”

Service Participation: 

Service Participation “I did inpatient treatment with the children in Pine Ridge, SD. We had in-home services and I got help with housing and I had outpatient treatment.” “We got family therapy with a counselor and cultural activities.” “They didn’t have me participate in any services except when a woman came over to monitor how I interacted with my son.”

Changes: 

Changes “The DHS Native American Unit brought our family back together. . . It was the first time I used a program that actually worked.” “The kids started to trust me again. We started to do family activities . . . Life is good. The family became closer.” “The fear went out of working with DHS, of asking for help, of being misunderstood or the kids being taken away. I started being honest about the problems.”

How the changes happened: 

How the changes happened “The DHS Native American Unit helped by having our family take the situation into our own hands and learn how the system works. The workers stood behind us and advocated for us, and helped us contact the Yankton Tribe for help too.” “I started being sober and got involved with the kids and their activities, with the school and the staff.”

Suggestions for Improvement: 

Suggestions for Improvement “I wish that the Unit had been developed years ago so they could have helped our children and many would not be lost in the system today . . . Long-term foster care should mean long term so the parents do not lose their children. Family placement should receive the money that foster and adoptive placements receive so (relatives can take in the children).” “I would have liked more communication between the worker and our family.” Native Mother & Child, Nome, AL HG Kaiser, 1915

What you were able to do: 

“Not given much choice. The Unit told me what services I needed and, if I didn’t do them, then my children would be taken away.” “I was able to give a lot of input on services. DHS came and helped me when I asked and when things became overwhelming.” What you were able to do “I felt like I had to “play the game” with DHS and let the adoptive mother try reunification. Everyone knew that was not going to happen. It was upsetting.” Sherwoodsspirit.com

The way services were chosen: 

The way services were chosen “ . . . I was surprised that they gave me a chance to participate in placement for my niece because of my past history with DHS. People change and the Unit recognized that and gave me a chance.” “At first I didn’t want treatment for my drug abuse, but now I know how it leads to negative behaviors and the wrong people.” Mohawk Mother & Child Clayhorsepottery.com “At first I thought it wasn’t working. I thought they were using my children to make me do things I didn’t think I needed.”

Worker’s level of interest: 

“The Unit workers had great interest from the beginning. They called right back and always helped with what we needed and helped resolve issues.” “I don’t feel my worker showed any interest, she only talks to me when we are at court. The worker wants me and my son’s father to communicate, and that is not going to happen. She is not doing much to get me out of the system.” Worker’s level of interest Narcisco Platero Abeyta (Ha-So-De), Navajo, b. 1918 Children to Day School, n.d. “The worker was helpful to both me and my children and was respectful of our family.”

Feelings re: what DHS provided: 

“I got my granddaughter back in my home and I’m waiting to hear from the Tribe to go to Tribal court. The workers helped me until the end. The Unit workers know their job and the support from the Unit made a difference.” “It was the first I saw DHS care for the children and understand the way of my culture and how I raise my children.” Spirit Child – Jamie Winter Feelings re: what DHS provided “Although it took two years in the system, I got my children back in my home. Today, I find it harder to get services because I am not drinking. I don’t like the way the system is set up so you can only get help if you are messed up.”

Having Native Workers: 

Having Native Workers “Yes. There is an understanding of how I live, my culture, my values, and my ethics. It helped me to be honest with DHS, and they did not look at me negatively.” “Yes, the worker has been the best thing for one of the girls because she can relate to her and sees hope that someone has made it and is successful.” Jamie Winter “It does make a difference when working with a Native worker. They have a better understanding and are more empathic rather than sympathetic. They don’t enable, they just help.”

Family team meetings: 

“The team helped me look at the goals and issues and helped me to reach them. They gave me direction, instead of focusing on myself, I focused on the issues to resolve them while the Native Unit was focusing on the safety and well-being of the kids.” Family team meetings “I was able to voice my opinions and got choices. I was involved in my own process. Before, they told me what to do, and I wondered if they were setting me up for failure.”

Nat’l Assn. of Public Child Welfare Administrators(NAPCWA, Amer. Public Human Services Assn.) Diagnostic Tool: 

Nat’l Assn. of Public Child Welfare Administrators (NAPCWA, Amer. Public Human Services Assn.) Diagnostic Tool

Recommendations: 

Recommendations Further analysis of existing data to examine decision points and improve interventions and outcomes. Develop data tracking system. Training in strengths-based practice. Recruit and involve families in program refinement, monitoring, and feedback. Utilize attention project is getting to advance work, especially through collaboration with the DMC Resource Center, Casey Alliance, Center for the Study of Social Policy, and Race Matters Consortium.

Comparing 2005 to 2006 . . . Abuse Assessments : 

Comparing 2005 to 2006 . . . Abuse Assessments

Comparing 2005 to 2006 . . . Placements During Child Protective Service Assessment : 

Comparing 2005 to 2006 . . . Placements During Child Protective Service Assessment

Comparing 2005 to 2006 . . . Tribal Intervention/Transfer: 

Comparing 2005 to 2006 . . . Tribal Intervention/Transfer

References, Resources & Publications on Reducing DMC: 

References, Resources & Publications on Reducing DMC United States Census Bureau. http://www.census.gov/ Papadopoulos, I. & Lees, S. (2002) Developing Culturally Competent Researchers. Journal of Advanced Nursing 37(3), 258-264. Cross, T.L. (1988) Cultural Competence Continuum retrieved on 1/30/07 at www.nysccc.org/T-Rarts/CultCompCont.html Preskill, H. & Russ-Eft, D. (2005). Building Evaluation Capacity. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA http://www.nccccurricula.info/assessment/B3.html retrieved on 1/30/07 7. American Evaluation Association. http://www.eval.org/Publications/GuidingPrinciples.asp. Retrieved 12/22/06 8. Cowles, T.B. (2005). Beyond Basic Training: Ten strategies for enhancing multicultural competency in evaluation. The Evaluation Exchange Vol. XI, No. 2, summer 2005.

References/Publications, continued: 

References/Publications, continued Office of Minority Health (2004) Cultural competence in cancer care: A health professional’s passport. Shui-Thornton, S. (2003). Addressing cultural competency in research: integrating a community-based participatory research approach. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, Vol 27, No. 8. pp 1361-1364. Symonette, H. (2004). Walking pathways toward becoming a culturally competent evaluator: Boundaries, borderlands, and border crossings. New Directions for Evaluation, no. 102, Summer 2004. Wiley Periodicals, Inc. A Strength- Based Culturally Competent Approach to Reducing D.M.C. Guidebook for Integration and Coordination of Child Welfare and Juvenile Justice Systems (Wiig & Tuell 2005). CHILD WELFARE LEAGUE OF AMERICA Disproportionate Minority Contact in the Juvenile Justice System CHILD WELFARE LEAGUE OF AMERICA www.uiowa.edu/~nrcfcp

References/Publications, continued: 

References/Publications, continued Borgatti, S.P., Everett, M.G. and Freeman, L.C. 2002. UCINET for Windows: Software for Social Network Analysis. Harvard, MA: Analytic Technologies. (NetDraw is part of UCINET.) Knoke, D. & Kuklinski, J.H. (1982). Network analysis. Sage University Paper series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, Series number 07-028. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Richardson, B. (2005). Evaluation of the Minority Youth and Families Initiative (MYFI) demonstration projects. Iowa City, IA: University of Iowa, School of Social Work, National Resource Center for Family Centered Practice. Richardson, B., and Graf, N. (2004). Measuring the strengths of community collaboration. The Prevention Report,1. Scott, J. (2000). Social network analysis: A handbook. Newbury Park CA: Sage Publications. Wasserman, S. & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Wasserman, S. & Galaskiewicz, J. (1994). Advances in social network analysis: Research in the social and behavioral sciences. Sage Publications.