{"id":332,"form_id":"22","user_id":"84","question_id":null,"organization_id":"13","tab_id":null,"question_type":null,"text_answer":"{\"Multiple_Choice__291\":\"Kelly Knutson\",\"Short_Answer__292\":\"Paul Lennander\",\"Date__293\":\"11\\\/13\\\/2017\",\"Multiple_Choice__294\":\"Other\",\"Yes_or_No__295\":\"No\",\"Short_Answer__297\":\"Licensed\",\"Yes_or_No__298\":\"Yes\",\"Multiple_Choice__299\":\"Licensed\",\"Multiple_Choice__300\":\"8\",\"Multiple_Choice__301\":\"Hennepin\",\"Short_Answer__303\":\"McKinley\",\"Short_Answer__304\":\"Askenette\",\"Date__305\":\"08\\\/06\\\/2017\",\"Multiple_Choice__308\":\"2 Months\",\"Multiple_Choice__309\":\"1\",\"Short_Answer__310\":\"Foster care parent\",\"Multiple_Choice__316\":\"2\",\"Short_Answer__317\":\"Placement capacity of shelter home\",\"Free_Text__318\":\"The human factors debriefing information was not documented at the request of the local agency due to pending litigation.  All of the local rationality information is captured in the narrative.\",\"Free_Text__319\":\"The decision to place a child in a shelter care home that was nearing capacity was influenced by no relatives being identified as immediate placement options.  While an extensive relative search was completed, many licensing barriers existed in licensing any of the relatives who were identified.  It is common in relative placement cases that the time it can take and the bureaucratic system created by both the local agency and DHS standards can influence placing children in an already licensed shelter care home versus one of a relative.  While a few of them may have been a viable options, the Judge ordered that the subject child be placed immediately into shelter care.  \\r\\nFurthermore, at this time, the placing process within the agency was for children to be immediately placed in shelter and that the shelter center locates the placement for the child\\\/children based upon needs to the child and who can care for the child.  Normative practice is to defer to shelter for these decisions. Staff also noted that in placement cases they are often balancing multiple competing goals.  Such as the location and placement with a relative often takes more time, which can be difficult when operating under tight permanency timelines.  While working to accomplish concurrent planning, staff also need to make reasonable and active efforts to reunify whenever possible.  Further impacting this pressure is the best practice of placement stability.  Best practice is to ensure children are placed in stable placement as soon as possible and such practices are also measured through state and federal placement stability performance measures creating additional pressure on staff to ensure placements are stable.\",\"Short_Answer__320\":\"Placement occurred in shelter versus a relative home.\",\"Free_Text__321\":\"The human factors debriefing information was not documented at the request of the local agency due to pending litigation.  All of the local rationality information is captured in the narrative.\",\"Free_Text__322\":\"The decision to place a child in a shelter care home versus a relative home was influenced by the fact that an extensive relative search was completed, and many licensing barriers occurred for many of the relatives identified as placement resources.  It is common in relative placement cases that the time it can take and the bureaucratic system for a relative to become licensed created by both local agency and DHS standards can influence placing children in an already licensed shelter care home versus one of a relative. Additionally, normative practice for this local agency is to place children in shelter care until a relative can be identified as a placement option.  This placing process further impacted the subject child being placed in shelter care versus a relative.  While a few relatives may have been viable options, when the critical incident occurred, the Judge ordered that the subject child be placed immediately into shelter care.  Further impacting this decision was that a relative was set to take the subject child but then decided at the last minute that they could not take the child.   \\r\\nAn additional influence into the subject child being placed in shelter care versus a relative care home was the difficulty in communicating with the state of Massachusetts.  The subject child's mother also had an open case and other children in placement in Massachusetts.  Staff noted significant barriers in obtaining any information at all from their CPS system\\\/staff related to the subject child's mother, siblings, their placements, and any other potential relative placement options for the subject child.  \\r\\nFurthermore, when this case came into the agency, it was assigned an initial kinship worker whom had been working to secure a relative placement for the subject child.  This initial kinship work went out on leave and the case at the time of the critical incident was transferred to another kinship worker.  This created challenges in communication around potential relative options that had been and were explored for the subject child further impacting the ability to identify and place with a viable relative option.  Furthermore, both kinship workers had made multiple attempts with relatives and all of the relatives contacted took a substantial amount of time to respond to both kinship workers.\",\"Multiple_Choice__346\":\"2\",\"Free_Text__347\":\"LP 1-Additionally, licensing staff conduct regular check-ins with relative placements to understand how they are feeling about taking other children and how things are going overall. This process supports a perception of trust that everything is going okay in the foster care home.  In this case, the provider was self-reporting that things were going well and that she could take an additional child and that she did not need additional support.  \\r\\n\\r\\nFurthermore, this provider had taken care of a number if infants such as the subject child that were high needs and drug exposed.  As a result, staff were confident in her ability to take another child.\",\"Multiple_Choice__348\":\"2\",\"Free_Text__349\":\"LP 1- In this case, the provider was self-reporting that things were going well and that she could take an additional child and that she did not need additional support.  However, at the time that the subject child was in placement, there were only two licensing workers carrying shelter caseloads (leaving them with 30-40 cases a piece).  As a result quarterly face-to-face check-ins with providers went to every other quarter face-to-face check-ins with phone calls during the other two quarters.\",\"Multiple_Choice__350\":\"0\",\"Multiple_Choice__352\":\"3\",\"Free_Text__353\":\"LP 2-An additional influence into the subject child being placed in shelter care versus a relative care home was the difficulty in communicating with the state of Massachusetts.  The subject child's mother also had an open case and other children in placement in Massachusetts.  Staff noted significant barriers in obtaining any information at all from their CPS system\\\/staff related to the subject child's mother, siblings, their placements, and any other potential relative placement options for the subject child.\",\"Multiple_Choice__354\":\"3\",\"Free_Text__355\":\"LP 3-\\r\\nAn additional influence into the subject child being placed in shelter care versus a relative care home was the difficulty in communicating with the state of Massachusetts.  The subject child's mother also had an open case and other children in placement in Massachusetts.  Staff noted significant barriers in obtaining any information at all from their CPS system\\\/staff related to the subject child's mother, siblings, their placements, and any other potential relative placement options for the subject child.  \\r\\n\\r\\nFurthermore, when this case came into the agency, it was assigned an initial kinship worker whom had been working to secure a relative placement for the subject child.  This initial kinship work went out on leave and the case at the time of the critical incident was transferred to another kinship worker.  This created challenges in communication around potential relative options that had been and were explored for the subject child further impacting the ability to identify and place with a viable relative option.  Furthermore, both kinship workers had made multiple attempts with relatives and all of the relatives contacted took a substantial amount of time to respond to both kinship workers.\",\"Multiple_Choice__356\":\"0\",\"Multiple_Choice__358\":\"2\",\"Free_Text__359\":\"LP 1-While an extensive relative search was completed, many licensing barriers existed in licensing any of the relatives who were identified.  It is common in relative placement cases that the time it can take and the bureaucratic system created by both the local agency and DHS standards can influence placing children in an already licensed shelter care home versus one of a relative.\\r\\n\\r\\nFurthermore, at this time, the placing process within the agency was for children to be immediately placed in shelter and that the shelter center locates the placement for the child\\\/children based upon needs to the child and who can care for the child.  Normative practice is to defer to shelter for these decisions. \\r\\n\\r\\nLP 2-The decision to place a child in a shelter care home versus a relative home was influenced by the fact that an extensive relative search was completed, and many licensing barriers occurred for many of the relatives identified as placement resources.  It is common in relative placement cases that the time it can take and the bureaucratic system for a relative to become licensed created by both local agency and DHS standards can influence placing children in an already licensed shelter care home versus one of a relative. Additionally, normative practice for this local agency is to place children in shelter care until a relative can be identified as a placement option.  This placing process further impacted the subject child being placed in shelter care versus a relative.  \\r\\n\\r\\nLP 2-Additionally, normative practice for this local agency is to place children in shelter care until a relative can be identified as a placement option.  This placing process further impacted the subject child being placed in shelter care versus a relative.  While a few relatives may have been viable options, when the critical incident occurred, the Judge ordered that the subject child be placed immediately into shelter care.\",\"Multiple_Choice__360\":\"2\",\"Free_Text__361\":\"LP 1- Staff also noted that in placement cases they are often balancing multiple competing goals.  Such as the location and placement with a relative often takes more time, which can be difficult when operating under tight permanency timelines.  While working to accomplish concurrent planning, staff also need to make reasonable and active efforts to reunify whenever possible.  Further impacting this pressure is the best practice of placement stability.  Best practice is to ensure children are placed in stable placement as soon as possible and such practices are also measured through state and federal placement stability performance measures creating additional pressure on staff to ensure placements are stable.\",\"Multiple_Choice__362\":\"2\",\"Free_Text__363\":\"Further impacting placement with this particular home was that there are never enough homes to take drug exposed infants.  \\r\\n\\r\\nLP 2-The decision to place a child in a shelter care home versus a relative home was influenced by the fact that an extensive relative search was completed, and many licensing barriers occurred for many of the relatives identified as placement resources.  It is common in relative placement cases that the time it can take and the bureaucratic system for a relative to become licensed created by both local agency and DHS standards can influence placing children in an already licensed shelter care home versus one of a relative. Additionally, normative practice for this local agency is to place children in shelter care until a relative can be identified as a placement option.  This placing process further impacted the subject child being placed in shelter care versus a relative.\",\"Multiple_Choice__364\":\"0\",\"Multiple_Choice__366\":\"0\",\"Yes_or_No__370\":\"Yes\"}","mcq_answer":null,"other_answer":"0","status":"1","created_by":"84","updated_by":71,"created_at":"5\/26\/2021 2:33:23 pm","updated_at":"6\/1\/2021 2:05:54 pm","deleted_at":null,"report_name":"McKinley Askenette"}