Policy
In-Home Voluntary Services
PCSAs are responsible for making face-to-face contact with each parent, guardian or custodian, and child participating in and being provided services no less than monthly to monitor progress on case plan objectives. At least one contact every two months must be made in the child's home. If the initial attempt of face-to-face contact is unsuccessful, PCSAs shall attempt a minimum of two additional face-to-face contacts within the calendar month (ORC 5101:2-39-08, 5101:2-38-01). A task list was developed and is included in the CPS Worker Manual and CAPMIS Field Guides (published in July 2006) to guide the PCSA in documenting quality discussions with families related to services and progress in meeting case plan goals.
Protective Supervision
The PCSA shall make face-to-face contact with each parent, guardian, or custodian, or, if applicable, pre-finalized adoptive parent, and child participating in and being provided services through the case plan no less than monthly to monitor progress on the case plan objectives. At least one contact every two months must be made in the child's home. If the initial attempt to complete face-to-face contact is unsuccessful, the PCSA shall make a minimum of two additional attempts to complete the face-to-face contacts within the calendar month. The PCSA may suspend home visits with the parent, guardian, or custodian of a child when conducting visits in the home presents a threat to the safety of the caseworker. A written justification to suspend visits in the home shall be documented in the case record (OAC 5101:2-39.081, 5101:2-38-05).
Safety Planning
In addition to the above mentioned caseworker visits with parents, upon CAPMIS implementation, PCSAs immediately develop and implement a Safety Plan when it is determined a child is in immediate danger of serious harm. The PCSA assesses the presence of active safety threats; the vulnerability of the child; the protective capacities of the parent, guardian, or custodian; and the family's history of child abuse and/or neglect resulting in serious harm to determine the degree of intervention necessary to control safety threats and protect the child. If, after the assessment of safety, the safety response is to implement an in-home safety plan or an out-of-in-home safety plan, the PCSA develops a Safety Plan utilizing the Safety Plan for Children. However, if, after the assessment of safety, the safety response is to implement a legally authorized out-of-home placement, the PCSA contacts law enforcement and/or removes the child.
Completion of the Safety Plan for Children is not required in this situation. The PCSA monitors the Safety Plan to ensure action steps control identified safety threats. PCSAs conduct weekly home visits to monitor in-home safety plans (child remains in the home). During home visits, the PCSA makes face-to-face contact with each child and parent involved in the safety plan. PCSAs have weekly contact with children or persons responsible for an action step either by telephone or face-to-face to monitor out-of-home safety plans (child is voluntarily placed with a third party). Additionally, the PCSA has face-to-face contact with each child every other week (OAC 5101:2-37-02).
Substitute Care Caseworker visits with children in substitute care
When a PCSA is granted temporary or permanent custody of a child and places the child in a relative or non-relative approved home, a foster home or group home certified by ODJFS the agency is required to:
• Conduct at least one face-to-face visit with the child and substitute caregiver within the substitute care setting during the first week of placement, not including the day of placement.
• Conduct at least one face-to-face visit with the child and the substitute caregiver within the substitute care setting during the first four weeks of placement, not including the visit during the first week of placement.
• Conduct at least one face-to-face visit with the child and the substitute caregiver monthly with at least one of the visits occurring in the substitute care setting within each six-month period.
(ORC 5101:2-42-65)
For children placed in a treatment or medically fragile foster home agencies are required to:
• Conduct at least one face-to-face visit with the child and substitute caregiver within the substitute care setting during the first week of placement, not including the day of placement.
• Conduct face-to-face visits with the child and the substitute caregiver at least once every two weeks with at least one of the visits occurring in the treatment or medically fragile foster home each month.
(ORC 5101:2-42-65)
For children placed in a children’s residential center (CRC) agencies shall:
• Contact the CRC within ten days of placement.
• Conduct face-to-face visits with the child at least every other month, with at least one visit in each six-month period occurring in the CRC.
(ORC 5101:2-42-65)
For children who are sixteen years of age or older and placed in an independent living arrangement in which the child is responsible for his individual living environment, agencies shall:
• Conduct a face-to-face visit with the child in the living environment within seven days of placement.
• Conduct monthly face-to-face visits with the child with at least two visits in each six-month period occurring in the living environment.
(ORC 5101:2-42-65)
For children in adoptive placement caseworkers are required to visit children in an adoptive placement no later than 7 days from the adoptive placement date. The caseworker must make face-to-face contact with the child monthly until finalization. Two visits in every 6 month period must be made in the adoptive home (OAC 5101:2-48-17).
Effective February 17, 2008, OAC rule 5101:2-42-65 Caseworker Visits and Contacts with Children in Substitute Care was revised to clarify content requirements including documentation of safety and well-being indicators such as functioning, vulnerability, significant family changes, goal progress, and permanency plans. The revised rule also added provisions to ensure all foster caregivers (listed on a
certificate) are visited regularly, increased visitation frequency requirements for “special needs” children, and identified the responsible party (caseworker) who may conduct visits.
Agencies placing children in a substitute care setting through the Interstate Compact for the Placement of Children agencies shall:
• Request the out-of-state children services agency provide needed supervision and services to the child as identified in the child’s case plan.
• Contact the substitute care setting within ten days of the child’s placement and at least every other month thereafter.
• Conduct a face-to-face visit with the child at least every six months.
Caseworker visits with parents of children who are in substitute care
For children in custody, PCSAs are required to make face-to-face contact with each parent participating in and being provided services, no less than monthly to monitor case plan progress. At least one contact every two months must be made in the home of the parent. If an attempted face-to-face contact is unsuccessful, the PCSA must attempt a minimum of two additional face-to-face contacts within the calendar month. Home visits may be suspended if the parent of a child in PCSA custody presents a threat to the caseworker. However, if the home visits are suspended, face-to-face contact with the parent is required to be conducted monthly in a safe location (OAC 5101:2-39-08.1, 5101:2-38-05).
Practice
As previously mentioned, Ohio’s child welfare system is state supervised, county administered. As a result, counties have some discretion in how rules are interpreted and implemented. During Ohio’s first CFSR, “Worker Visits with Parents” was identified as an “Area Needing Improvement.” At that time, 34 percent of applicable review cases, revealed visits were not sufficiently documented to promote safety and well-being outcomes for families. Of the other cases, many PCSAs exceeded minimal State requirements for contact with parents. Prior to December 2001, OAC rules did not mandate frequency of caseworker visits with parent(s) for court involved cases and PCSAs made these determinations individually. Particular weaknesses were noted in documentation for monitoring case plan progress, identifying individual participants, and specifying locations of face to face contacts. In September 2005, minimal frequency requirements for in-home supportive services caseworker/parental visits were stipulated in rule.
The CAPMIS model, specifically the Case Review tool, is meant to improve and increase caseworker contacts with the family. The Case Review is completed every three months to assist the caseworker in reviewing safety and risk issues while assessing case plan services. Because CAPMIS tools incorporate family perspectives, as well as resources/strengths, it is believed review activities will help caseworkers engage families in case planning activities, as well as improve the quality of caseworker/family contacts.
During CPOE Stage 6 reviews, 84 counties were monitored for visitation compliance requirements set forth in the above mentioned rules, excluding visits required as a result of development of a Safety Plan (recent rule requirement). A random selection of cases were reviewed and agencies not achieving a 90 percent compliance level were required to develop a QIP.
Worker Visits with Parents and Children in their own Homes In-Home Voluntary
Nine Hundred sixty-four in-home supportive services cases were reviewed for compliance with making face-to-face contact with each parent, guardian or custodian, and child participating in and being provided
services no less than monthly to monitor progress on the case plan objectives and conducting at least one contact every two months in the child's home. Results are summarized below:
Type of Visit Monthly Visits Visits in the Home at Least every 2 Months
Children 72.3% 82.5%
Parent, Guardian, or Custodian 65.9% 79.1%
Analysis reveals medium-small size counties achieved a higher compliance rating than other county size groupings. Medium-size, large and metro counties achieved better compliance scores for conducting visits in the home at least every two months. During case reconciliations, some agencies indicated visits occurred; however caseworkers failed to document visits in case records. Other agencies indicated high caseworker turnover, as well as parental “no shows”, impacted poor compliance ratings.
Protective Supervision
During CPOE Stage 6, 1,187 protective supervision cases were reviewed to determine compliance with making face-to-face contact with each parent, guardian, or custodian, or, if applicable, pre-finalized adoptive parent, and child participating in and being provided services through the case plan no less than monthly to monitor progress on the case plan objectives and at least one contact every two months must be made in the child's home. The following table reveals statewide results:
Type of Visit Monthly Visits Visits in the Home at Least every 2 Months
Children 74.3% 83.7%
Parent, Guardian, or Custodian 62.4% 75.4%
Further analysis reveals medium-small counties achieved higher compliance ratings for conducting monthly visits than other county groupings. Small agencies had the most difficulty achieving compliance for visiting every two months in the child’s home.
It is important to note, data results are somewhat skewed as results are based strictly on case record documentation as well as requirements for documenting visitation content. In some reviews, contacts were documented but required content was not. As a result, review results may overestimate actual visitation non-compliance. CPOE Stage 7 measurement tools were modified to differentiate required documentation content and completion of face- to-face contacts to ensure compliance is assessed in both domains.
Worker Visits with Children in Foster Homes or Group Homes
A review of 1,417 cases during CPOE Stage 6, revealed the following results for substitute care visitation compliance:
Further analysis reveals, except for metro counties, all other county size groupings were at or near substantial compliance with requirements for conducting visits with children during the first week of placement. Medium-small and medium size counties achieved better scores for visiting children during the first four weeks of placement.