{"report_id":276,"form_id":"22","user_id":81,"organization_id":13,"question_id":"347","question_type":"Free_Text","text_answer":"Learning point #1:\r\nThe licensing agency not being notified by the placing agency when the sibling child was placed was influenced by staff's perception that notification had been given, as the worker previously informed the licensing agency of the intention to place the sibling child with the relatives.\r\n\r\nThere was also an assumption made by the FI worker that notice was given by the current worker.\r\n\r\nFurther influencing the licensing agency not being notified by the placing agency when the sibling child was placed was the relationship between the licensing worker and the foster care parents (relatives), as the foster care parents would likely have informed the licensing worker that the sibling child had been placed, which influenced the perception that notification was given.\r\n\r\nLearning point #2:\r\nThe subject child had significant medical needs and the sibling child's foster care provider stated they could not care for the subject child. Because of the ambivalence, the agency perceived that if they placed the subject child with the sibling child's foster parents, it placed both placements at risk of disruption; therefore, the agency made the decision to not place the subject child with the sibling child's foster parents.","created_by":81,"updated_by":81,"updated_at":"5\/26\/2021 11:07:48 am","created_at":"5\/26\/2021 11:07:48 am","id":29389}