The Department Human Services, which is basically services that are intended to help keep kids in with their families in the community. And so they're advisory over those that service category. They're also advisory board over death prevention grants. And then they are our decision making board over the CMP, our 1451 programming, which is legislative collaborative management program. So when we kala comes in and talks about the MOU every year, every year, we have to do an MOU, and kind of identify what are the three outcomes that we're going to target to each. And what that creates is, that now allows us to draw down funds. So how it works at the allocation level at the state is that you meet your cert each for each outcome, if you meet it, you get a certain pot of money for each outcome you meet. And so that every year, we contract with CSU PE paid for out of the Department of Human Services not paid for out of CMP dollars, to do what we call phase one. So the Phase One outcomes, it is just didn't meet the outcomes that we said we were going to meet with all of our services that are kind of under the umbrella of this group. And then so Mark doesn't report for us and sends that off to the state market CSU and then this year, we did get all of our meet all of our measures. So we will some point here in the next few months find out what our allocation is. So what this is, is referencing and you'll see it says Phase Two on the screen there. So phase two is a much deeper dive and not required as part of the CMP. But it's something that we committed to many years ago as a board to have a better understanding of how all the services were kind of performing with the kids that they're serving, or the families or families we're serving. So just to the level set phase two is a much deeper dive. It is and as Mark presented last month, it has broken out by service categories. We don't break it out by service agencies like for example. See what's a given coaching. We have five agencies somewhere around there five agencies doing what we call coaching services in the community. And so we don't break it out by agency, we comp everybody together and kind of roll it up to this overarching kind of snapshot on the different categories. So as Mark talked about last month, kind of went over the different the different graphs that we kind of looked at peaked at just a little bit ago. And then there's Appendix C is kind of as more of a overall cheat map, if you will, of all of those outcomes, as well as the service category. So that sort of type of on the left across the top are the 11 outcomes that LCI OG said was important to this group. Before I before I started coming, so we're talking many years, 15 years, probably. So just just reframing that something maybe they keep in mind for our next agenda item about kind of what our purpose and goals and hopes are is with this group is those those things across the top of what we came up with many years ago. And later today, maybe we can have a conversation on other opportunities we might feel would be important as well. So just wanted to get a little level since you're new new members and a few folks that are joining today that haven't joined in the past.
It might be good to sad, since we have new members to just go over a little bit more about the headings on each of those and what that actually means.
So let's see, we'll have to go I don't have the index in front of me. But so if you go up, scroll up, Marcia, that page above. Right, up to the seventh. The first one there. Yeah. So the behavioral mental health services are kind of so has a little perspective as a department, Human Services and child welfare we are required us to have basically, I think it's eight core programs that we offer to families. And so behavioral slash mental health services kind of get his stuff in the required thing. And many things get rolled up into that. What I would say is the behavioral health and mental health service line item really is it's kind of the middle specialty population. So they don't We don't, we don't serve a lot from that line item because in many of these other categories, like trauma informed care and services, substance abuse treatment. There's other categories over there that actually aren't doing mental health services and behavioral health services but we we fine tune them into a little different category. So behavioral mental health services is a pretty small in if you will, and kind of as a catch all for ones that don't necessarily fit in other categories. The cet or team to steep team decision making, so we do at the unit. So again, since this board is all Over core services, we fund three core services, our family engagement team. And so we have three different pot buckets in this service type that are that represent family meetings and outcomes as those are represented. So si t TDM is one of those forms of family meetings, we have four counting fact different types of family meetings. Coaching is another kind of we coaching is probably our highest probably our highest expenditure service type, both from the lens of 1451, as well as from the lens of core services. And really coaching is mentorship almost, but it's my skills, it's coaching, it's basically having staff help support youth land or parents in whatever kind of needs are. So it's kind of a catch all that allows you to be really flexible and serve whatever the needs are, whatever the family needs that moment instead of having to be kind of too restrictive, if you will. The family habit it is, we have family advocates that this group pays for that helps support fat. So that's Family Advocate. family empowerment, can't remember off the top of my head right now. I think there's one of our family meetings as well. family group decision making is the is another form of family meeting, family partnership, I think most of you, many of you may know family partnerships. It's our kind of our juvenile justice arm of DHS, but they what we created many years ago as a family partnership program. That was actually published many years ago as showing evidence of keeping kids out of the juvenile detention facilities. And so it was theater research and comparative research that CSU did for us. And it's a published program out there. I family or family, we family, the family as a service that we pay housing community service in the Matthew's house to serve as prevention caseworkers in the community serving families so that they don't ideally getting in front of that risk that drives them into child welfare. And so the hoping is that they don't come to child welfare because they're being served by our community partners. And we're providing funding for those agencies to help support that work. The fact is, is that foster care and adoptive services, those are things that are specifically targeted at certain supporting foster care families or adoptive families. Home Based is kind of a clump, we have lots of different types of home based providers that are doing different types of in home services. So that is, that group. If t is intensive family therapy LCRC or CBFs s. That's our offense specific program we designed through this group many years ago that was intended to serve as a diversion to us being driven deep into the juvenile justice system to have offense specific behavior challenges. So that helps support some programming that the BAS offense does fork does. For those, those kids that that program came about many years ago, because we had when we were when we had a lot of kids in residential, almost 80% of those kids in residential are kids that had offense specific issues. And they were often in residential for multiple years. When we designed that program to get the help support families and keeping those kids in the community. Life Skills is basically found visitation services provided mostly by in house and a couple other internal local contracted agencies. Mediation has parent and child mediation services nurse advisor is a contract we have with the public health to provide us or not, yeah, health department, I guess I should say. It's the nurse advisor that helps goes out with our caseworkers to help help us pay attention the medical needs of their very vulnerable kids that we're serving. parent education as a parent is what it sounds like. PPP Prevention Plus pathways, which is programming through the center of family outreach. PRT is a permanency roundtable. So in child welfare, it is it is a process to help pay attention to permanency and help to achieve permanency for youth is what it's intended to do. The CU the cam and FSM is I would call that hard service dollars, cash to help support hard service needs of that families might have whether it's paying rent or utilities or whatever else that might be in challenges. sex abuse treatment within sex abuse treatment is both offense specific treatment and victim treatment. Substance Abuse Treatment is what it sounds like. supervised visitation is more therapeutic version of supervised visits down at the bottom there compared to life skills, which is not therapeutic per se. trauma informed care. There's lots of services that get bundled into that that includes our trauma assessments that happen through CSU trauma focused CBT Anything that's trauma related, we bucket it into that trauma informed category. Truancy program is, this group pays for some portions of positions in both Thompson and pooter school district to support truancy program for young kids. So elementary age targeting and versus the older age group. If you can scroll down for me, Marcy. And then this last video, because our is our out of home population buckets, to be able to see the same a similar comparison. So county foster homes are the homes that we license that are local to us. CPAs are child placement agencies, so they're private foster care agencies, group homes, group centers, so it's that's a level of congregate care, but it's not residential. Kinship Care, is what it sounds like. And then there's residential care, which includes QR GPS, RCCs, and shelter care and that residential care grouping. And somehow, I remembered most of those names, so I'm feeling pretty good about myself.
So as we look across at the green, and the red, and the yellow, some of those are more specific to certain kinds of treatment, so I call it and others than others. So I'm not always sure how to assess where one looks like it's only got one or two green things. But saying, let's look at the sexual abuse treatment area.
So, so a couple of things that we've done with this iteration that makes it much more fine tune than it has in the past. And that is Mark, if you remember, last month, he shared how they've done a basically they leveled the field. So we're talking apples to apples and oranges to oranges. So basically, these percentages on here represent what they should have, what the expected outcome would have been for the families they were serving based on the population and the rest of the population that they're serving. So in the past, we didn't used to have that you would just have you did, we didn't make an effect for that risk. So now what this represents is, if you're in the red, that means you're underperforming, what we would expect that service category to perform based on the population that they're serving the risk levels, the risks and traumas, screen scores and those kinds of things, and other characteristics, whereas the green represents that you're well at over performing what we would expect you to do in that category in that outcome measure and by that service type.
So under the column where we're talking about substantiated under the last column there for sexual abuse, tell me what how I should interpret that.
So what that would say is, so substantiation means that do we have a substantiation that occurred after service started? So was there was it or abuse and neglect that occurred after we started that service category. And so I would have interpreted that that we do really well in our community as serving families and not having new abuse and neglect happening, because almost everybody's in the green. And even the red categories are relatively close to a flat outcome. That makes sense. So I guess that's the best way to perform it. And when you so if you're looking at that, and you want to say, okay, who's doing the best in that category, you would be our 7%. It looks like so foster care and adoption support. Down at the bottom, Prevention Plus pathways, so kids that are being served from Laurie's program at the center are not showing up in child welfare with new substantiation would be how, right?
So, and looking at this where we might want to target some of the red areas. Are there proven progress for some of those areas that could make a difference?
So kind of thinking from the lens of where we see a lot of red, is there something else that we should be researching to find the kind of answer that's the right would be a good way to use it? Yeah.
Well, Dan and I are doing a lot of talking. I'd like some inputs from some of the rest of you.
I really appreciate that you
asked those questions because I unfortunately, I missed last month's meeting and just understanding more about how, how we should be interpreting this really does help so giving that context is really useful. Um, and to just comment on your idea around, should we be looking at additional supports means methods, things like that, or evidence based ways to do these things? I think that could be one way we we approach it I, I would be curious that there is there some sort of threshold where we should be looking at this and saying, oh, it's that much in the red, or it's that much of an issue that
we should really try to target it. I don't think you don't necessarily have a threshold only because this is the first iteration of their model. But the ones I mean, there are a few categories that are pretty clearly in the red in most categories, right. So there might be some opportunity to perhaps target in discussions on brainstorming on what gaps and we might we be having in our community that might be getting in the way and to me that might be hearing from people that are living it day to day line work, you know, line staff versus us in our in our seat here.
That makes a lot of sense.
So a few things that stand out to me when I look at real quick, like, supervised visits, and that supervised visitation categories are therapeutic visits. And often everybody believes that is the that is the best parent supervision model. But it is not reunifying kids very well, we're using that model. But if you look at life skills, although it's still a negative 2%, at some much closer to where they should be versus a negative 19%. And that's a supervised by parent are our staff and other community members that are not necessarily necessarily therapeutic or therapy. So that's an interesting thing that stands out. Considering those two service types are very similar.
I also appreciate the comment that you made Abby about. If you do look at things that we know are working or evidence based or pieces that could move some of these areas more to the green, that's a lot more positive way to approach it than it is punitive way to approach it. Just to comment on that.
Well, and I also think we need as we look at this, and we don't have the numbers along there. These are all percentages and the numbers in different areas are different. The number of kids that we're talking about
I think you can go back and try that.
Yeah, yeah, it's up with like the total hands for those are kind of up. The challenges, the ends for each service category are very dependent on each outcome, right. So you can't just say it's an end for behavioral health services is 100. Because it might be 100 for one of the outcomes, but not 100 for one of the other outcomes, if that makes sense. But also,
if we're trying to target where we could move some of these. And this is just an example. It has nothing to do with reality. But let's say one of the area's only served three kids. And the other areas serve fire 400, we're looking at a whole different realm.
Other thoughts from others?
Now this is later on the agenda for discussion, but just kind of reaffirming the focus of the OCIO G, and then looking at the top of this chart on the different kind of goals are just wondering if that would help to kind of reaffirm what we're trying to look at. If we're are those still the targeted areas that were wanting to focus in and measure and have goals? And then does that lead us to identifying where we target energies?
I think that could help. Would you want to go over those columns and identify what those goals are?
Sure I can. So Marcy, I'll just follow across, you've got them up on the screen. Remain home the definition that is that 90 90% of CMP youth will remain home during their involvement with a cmp collaborative management programs. Successful probation is free 86% of CMP youth will successfully complete probation.
Those are our measures for our phase one. Right? Those Yeah. Yeah.
And then recurrence.
Sad. And that second one there that 56%, that number has decreased over the years, right? I mean, that number, the goal is a lot higher. But, you know, we used to be at one point, servicing about 500 kids in the community. And now we're servicing about 150 kids in the community. And those kids are basically all higher risk that that's currently in house and all the lower risk kids are at the center with Laurie cliff at this point. So the numbers of flip flopped in the last six years, how many how many kids they're servicing versus, and the risk level those kids at probation now is all Hybris.
Yeah, we move that marker down a few your as your numbers started dropping when we started getting more of the top tier, this but that 56% does not represent everybody on probation. It only represents those on probation that were served by some CMP programming, whether it's fat core services, anything, you know, kind of this category. So it's doesn't represent all the other probation kids that maybe didn't access any services or supports through our through my system or through FAFSA or provincial programming.
reoccurrence of abuse then is defined as 93% of CMP youth will not have a recurrence of substantiated abuse. After their involvement with services with CMP programs, placement is 78% or more of CMP youth who have been in out of home placement less than 12 months will have no more than two placement moves. re entry may maintain re entry rate for CMP youth within a range of 10 to 15%. Reunification maintain reunification rate for CMP youth within a range of 70 to 80%. New charges, maintain new charges new charge rate within a range of 30 to 40%. For CMP youth ages 10 and older at the start of service Barbu it must be divided with DVS commitment, maintain PVS commitment rate within a range of one to 3% for CMP youth ages 10 and older at the start of service drop out. And I'm seeing our index that we have a definition of
belts drop out in the last couple of years we haven't been able to match our data with with PSD and Thompson. So we don't we didn't get drop out data relevant to CMP kids this last year. So Mark did not include in the in the matrix. So that drop out percentages represents. So the other thing I forgot to mention earlier is that this is three years worth of data, right? And so the dropout data is representative of kids a couple years ago, so maybe Liz and you and I can touch base and partner wherever you are, Charlie, whoever your replacement his can touch base about is what in essence there's there's some connecting processes we have to go through to be able to get it because that natively.
And then the last column is substantiated abuse, and that's 90% of CMP youth will have no substantiated abuse findings during or after services begin.
That's a lot of information. And that starts on page like those definitions start on page 55.
You can take this thing down Marcy, it's okay. So is it right reference? I mean, now that attachment was in the email that Marcy sent out this morning, so
I think we actually got it twice. So that's good.
So again, you know, we really our have this group to try to help guide the directions that we should be trying to focus on and not just telling you things but to get input from you, relating to what you think we might be able to do to enhance the services that we've got
So I have a question about the data I was looking at, when I'm looking at that, and we're considering the effectiveness of the different types of services. And that was kind of the, my understanding of the summary of that, is it difficult to look at that the effectiveness, when you consider how the targeted service will look different, depending on the criticality of the need certain types of needs are going to be higher risk and therefore will be challenged for the specific service type. So maybe the outcome is less likely to be successful, because they started out in a more critical position. Does that make sense
that does and it's true, but Mark has adjusted for that in the model. So again, for one service category one, one ideal marker for one outcome might be based on so it's based on the population that those services are those people are already serving. So there, so mark is taking in trauma screening scores, risk scores, other characteristics that we know to be more at create more risk for families to be high acuity. And so, so one, one goal might be everybody should be able to achieve 95% on this one. But in a very different service category might say, based on the population you're serving, you really only should be able to achieve any person. And so that kind of adjusts for that acuity that they're serving, and what the intensity of from service to service might might look like. So it isn't, we made multiple iterations trying to get to a place where we can do some apples to apples versus not being able to understand it. And when I think we're really close to having an apples to apples snapshot here.
I would be curious to know from these programs, because we know data shows like one piece of the whole story, right? So I'd be curious to know, what they would need or why for some of those underperforming areas. Speaking from the juvenile justice perspective, I'm anticipating that my data is going to look a lot different than it did two years ago, just because of, you know, the risk of youth that we are serving in the community and, and we do see anecdotally kids picking up more charges and, and so we start there with that conversation. And then okay, how do we need to adapt our programs? What more do we need to address where things are at now versus where things are out when we set those goals? So that may be an interesting conversation to bring some of the, the program's voices to this group and hear some of those things that explains the why or what they're seeing with the boots on the ground people.
Think that's a great idea. So a great opportunity, because it's almost like it's the strength based lands, right. So how to help us, let's have a conversation about what opportunities are existing to help move that move that forward. But it could be you know, we do our spotlights every month, or maybe we start shifting spotlights to become, let's pick the two or three categories that we feel heard outcomes that we feel like we want to talk about, and then start inviting groups of providers that are in that camp service category to come and do a joint conversation instead of just a 20 minute one spotlight it's a conversation about who they're serving challenges that they're having those kinds of things right. That's good idea.
After looking at the numbers, does anything jump out to people on what they would like to have some input from others on in an upcoming session?
Think that's all A question for me to answer partially because I missed a big part of the discussion. So you may have discussed this. But looking through the report, it's hard to tell. I mean, we have numbers about the the success rate. But I know from personal experience that then the numbers of people that these different programs reach are like, vastly different. And so it may, if it's in here somewhere, tell me where to find it. But no understanding which of these programs has, has both big reach and big impact in the big reach that it has.
Of now if you're in, it's a big report, so we may not be able to get to that. So maybe we can do this for next month, again, Abby. But if you scroll up, each of the outcomes has the different service types. And so like, for example, on page 32, or not 3332 33, wherever that was recurrence of the abuse, so it has a service type on the left side on the right side has the end related to that service type. So that's the number of families that were closed. So again, that's close service types as not open at the point in time, because you have to let the service and bid to be able to measure outcomes. So for example, we have, you know, hard service dollars is getting is serving a lot of families. And it's made and it's above the the observed success, or the predictive success rate. Where as our Fs RT, our family meeting model that's in the front end of it is serving a good chunk, but they're under performing what we would predict their success rate to be. But his Yeah, and what is getting to know what kind of your point earlier Pat is, you'll notice the predicted success rate off all of these is like really high, like 96, like 96 and a half and up right, like that's the lowest predicted. So it might that might be another factor to figure out which category and we focus on is ones that are already predicted to be really high, we don't have a whole lot of room to move, right versus maybe finding something that's got a little lower predicting, because they're really serving a really acute level of family and youth. And then finally, those groups that are need a little more category, there are more support. So you know, jumping up to probation completion, for example, there's only a few service types that are kind of intended to kind of leave that population, but their predicted success rates for all of those is only 55%, as opposed to 96 and a half of the other one, right. So there might be opportunities to.
I think it would be interesting to look at like on the probation table, because that's where I am in this chart, on page 31, in home based services serve a relatively small number of families only 18. And they are not as successful. And I would have lots of questions about what are the families that they're serving? Do? Are there other opportunities for them to be serving different families? And how can we shore shore up their services to help them meet those those expectations? Or is there one piece that they're missing that it would be helpful for us to know about?
I wonder if there's value in this group figuring. If the Gantt chart on the bottom, there's two or three buckets that are really lots of reds, not very many greens. And so maybe those are the bucket three buckets that we that we do a little bit of that dive into Right. So there's a lot of categories that have a fair amount of greens, but the ones that have a ton of red in that outcome marketplace instability, reentry, maybe reunification with the next in line there, maybe those were the three ones we start with, and then hone in on those service conversations.
LED maybe now's a good time to move on to the broader conversation of IoT.
Well, I wonder Sure. Do we need to go back on the agenda?
Oh, we got Kayla here. That's true. It was here. The MOU.
Yeah, so why don't we go back to Kayla and then move on to the other part after that Hello.
Wow, sorry I'm late. I just got here. So I'm not sure exactly what you wanted me to speak on for the MOU?
I think so generally, is there anything based on we I know we sent a draft to the state got some feedback from the state? Is there anything that you wanted to share with this group on any substance, and I can't say the words, I'm gonna butcher that substance to that word. I've never been able to say that word, changes to this to our MOU, just to highlight for this group, because then the next step that will be coming is we need to do some cleanup still internally and getting that the costs and all that other stuff in there. But it will be making its rounds through Marcy to get all of your signatures.
Yeah. So ultimately, and Marcy and I have kind of partnered on this, I just want to be transparent that we sort of expected Ali right to be able to help with this and due to unexpected, like leave. We have ticket ticket out together, me Sue and Marcia been partnering. Ultimately, I don't believe that there are any significant changes, we are keeping the same goals that we had last year, we're carrying those over. And I believe those goals were to have less involvement in juvenile delinquency system to have kids be at home and to increase safety can correct me if I'm wrong, sewer mercy, if I miss your membrane, but we're going to carry over those goals, as those are goals that are consistent with their McKinney's philosophies, and and with what we are trying to achieve, especially in this current climate where there are so many mental health crises for youth and families right now. And ultimately, we're just carrying over those goals. Is there anything you wanted to add Marcy or sue to that? No. Yeah. So I think it's really going to be quite quite similar to how it was last year.
And I don't think we got I mean, I know we sent the draft off just to have them look at it. I don't think we got any significant feedback, right already. So
the biggest feedback was really around like, they're using a new table this year. So the formatting and like, some wording around what we're now calling different programs versus what we called them last year. So really No, I wouldn't say there's any feedback that was really based on content. So yeah.
Any question so as a kind of level set, the MOU is a requirement from the state if we had to be so CMPs are in legislation, you're not required to be a cmp, you are allowed to be in CMP. And you have to go through an application process. We did it many, many years ago. But every year as a result, you have to have an MOU agreement with the state on what what it is you're measuring what the expectations are in some kind of and also it kind of shared what is the what is the risk sharing for lack of a better way to say it that happens within the community. CMP is about collaborative is collaborative management programming. So they really want to be able to measure the collaboration that's happening community. So that is part of you know, us intended to cover. So once we get our RFP pieces internal captured in there, we'll start Merci, I don't know what process and we'll go through whether it's Adobe or
probably Docusign. Here, so be looking for that
I would say in the next, let's say by the end of May.
I know sometimes if my DocuSign is internal even happen, they end up in my spam somehow. So maybe Marcy, when you send the DocuSign if you can also maybe just send an email your own email to say hey, as a heads up, you should be seeing a DocuSign coming through. Yeah, good idea.
Hey, are there any questions for Kayla?
Well, I think then we can probably move on to revisiting the goal focus and purpose of Elijah of life
I say not to do so much target. Christmas. So you got the white paper, everyone? Yeah, so that white paper, and I keep referencing going way back and that white paper was created. Before I was a deputy, so it's probably 10 News, at least maybe even more.
Ours? I think it says 2004 you What?
No, oh, geez, we need to update that sector. So Right. So that was something that was created as a mechanism to share many years ago because our so worked. And I wish we had Cindy and some of the other long term errs around here to help with this conversation. But we are relatively different than many other counties, many other CMPs across the state, a lot of other CMPs are very focused on very small populations of kids and families, like zero to eight, right? Our focus is the zero day teens. And it really is within intended focus in keeping kids in communities healthy with families and out of higher levels of care. And so this group has, you know, other counties does don't have core services lumped in under this other counties don't have prevention, programming lumped in under that, like all that kind of stuff. And so we are, this is a much broader group. So we were trying to capture way back when that's really scary, it's battled kind of what were, how it was formed, and what what the intention was. And obviously, there's been a whole lot of changes in since 2004, there's been a whole lot of changes in the last three years. Console shot, like there might be an opportunity to do a little level set, we've had a lot of new additions coming into the board or going to be coming into the board. And so I really, really wanted to have a bit of a level set on Who are we and who do we want to be and who should we be kind of conversation. So I'm really hoping to hear from you all, kind of your perspective on this conversation in a very sunny day. And I think we share a little bit of this latter last means but to give you a really high level, this group has over history has done a lot of stuff. Going back 2004, we had somewhere in the range of 70 kids in residential care on a on a near daily average. Right now we're averaging six, that's because of the work of this group. We have to Well, I guess multiple community life centers in this community, two of them were formed because of the work of this group. And the funding that came from scooped out support the standard those of those community life centers with Matthews house, house and neighborhood services and now they continue to kind of spread and have other really light centers kind of sprouting up within the community. This group how to strike helped form and write the prevention grants and our trauma SAMSA grant that we have for trauma assessments many years ago, the same grant that our prevention grant that Deb's team is doing and so it's this group that really helps to move programming in the community to serve the best way we can kids and families and specifically those that are most at risk of entering multiple systems that's really is the task that CMPs have is to keep to serve multi system involved families to help support them and keep them together and in communities and healthy so little bit of a level sentimental for more than I need to say and we really needed Cindy here today because she's she's been on the board way longer than me Don't tell her I said that she's old but she's kind of old.
We're all gonna tell her I won't put that in the notes that a lot of things happen to after House Bill 1451 and to being and pay Reeves as I recall, really worked to try to get that put in and was an advocate to help do what we wanted done. And certainly has made a difference in having some ongoing funding to meet the needs of the community
you guys, I don't know if I mean that white papers lengthy and it's really old. And so I don't know if anybody's had a chance to review it. But in the takeaways from that or anything that you see is kind of hearing what what the intended purpose and goals were in the beginning. Is there thoughts on there? We're still have the proper purpose and intention and goals or is there something else that we should also be incorporating into to our world? Let's start there.
Hey, Todd, this is Frankie as I guess as I think about it, you know,
is there any upcoming legislation or any passages or bills that may be impacting the direction we're going to be heading?
It's possible so the is a very is a race of the child prosecution, but I can't move the number 1294 Maybe that's where it is right now. That has passed both sides, but there was some pretty significant amendments that happened on the Senate floor. before it got passed, so it's sitting with the governor, there were some rumors the governor might actually be was going to veto the old version. But there was a lot of amendments that happened at the Senate floor. So I haven't had enough time to look at what the new amendments are. If it if it went through as it was, it was gonna significantly change, maybe not change what we, because we're already kind of helping to support and serving those, those kids. But how we serve them, it was potentially going to change for us and like that, that bill basically was was moving the chargeable age up to 13. And basically testing to communities CMPs have to serve the 10 to 12 population that used to historically get charged for delinquency acts for there were some really significant changes on the Senate floor. So it's much more of a, as I understand that, let's learn it. Let's gain more understanding. But before we do significant changes, but I guarantee you that those coming back for next year, if if, based on what I'm hearing. So maybe more to come. And we would have a year of time. Ideally, we'd have your time to wrap our brains around how we could do it here. We've got some ideas for sure.
And are we able to make adjustments on the purpose and mission? I mean, do you want to? I mean, should we be revisiting that? And it's up
to the board, I would say CMP has it has to be targeted and serving kids and families in multiple systems. So that's kind of a there's some half Jews. I think paying attention to some of the stuff that we our mission and values and keeping kids in our community and our higher levels of care is that what generates funding right for us to put in the pot to help support programming. So I don't know that, but anything's game, for sure. Him to me, I'm not sure that the our mission or values or goals or our mission is all that different. But maybe some of the outcomes and goals and things that we need to be paying attention to maybe reevaluated. I don't know.
I mean, I wonder about, you know, reviewing some of the, you know, getting upstream a bit, understanding the legislation, and aligning our work aligning the policies and the legislation and what we need here, you know, you know, it says, you know, to prepare a plan and review, but I wonder how much of a plan, like a five year map we do based on the data based on what's happening in our communities? And is this as is this an opportunity as well to leverage right with grants and policy, you know, other community partners in the space? Okay, I'm rambling, but just wondering about a review of some, the mission and the purpose, and could we expand or? I don't know.
I wonder if we might get a group of volunteers that wanted to spend a little time and look at that and bring back something to the bigger group.
I was wondering that too, like maybe a working group where there's solid representation of the child welfare, the juvenile justice and, and kind of everything in between to make sure that all of our bases are covered. And you know, for the raise the floor bill is specifically a it'll impact juvenile justice world a lot, but they think it's going to create this big gap in services where typically, excuse me, our historically that would be a population we were able to serve on the CDC side and help with services and now what's going to happen and what gaps is that going to create? And as I look through the mission and the purpose I don't like that said I don't think there's much changing but everything else, maybe just a small working group to see if anything's changed from those other perspectives as well and update that.
Do we have some people in here that thinks they could find some time to help work on this?
I would be
willing And to do that and participate, I definitely would need the support of a lot of the people who work in these specific areas, I can do more of that prevention public health lens, but I definitely would want other people who specifically work in these realms, but I would be willing to do that.
I would also be willing to go alongside I don't want to be the one to take the lead. But I'm happy to go alongside a group of people and help out.
Yeah, as, as soon as I'm happy to help out, I don't think I could take the lead. But I'm happy to help out as well.
I would really like to, but I'll be transitioning off the board. So I know that it's a whole thing. But I am definitely going to put, as I'm recruiting for the next year, y'all to sit on this board. I am going to be talking to them about the potential of this working group. That's really exciting.
So I too, will be transitioning out but I am sure that my replacement would love to be a part of this.
Surely I am so glad I don't have to follow you because I every conversation I've had with you these days, Charlie's like hey, my new person is gonna love them.
I'm happy to pop in as I can. Yeah. For sure. Very interested in supporting the work. So.
So let's see, we've
got Liz Nichol. Sarah. Andrea. Sure. Charlie's replacement. And were there others?
Sarah? Yeah, then we'll we'll have somebody from the Child Welfare site join.
So who do you think could bring the group together? I can help do that.
I think that if you're going to sit down and do that, probably at the next meeting, it would be good for us to get a report on where are you in the process, I
love the idea of forming subcommittees to tackle a little specialty work. So we can keep moving moving us forward. And I'll be totally honest, has felt like and a lot of this is COVID. So I'm going to blame COVID For everything for many years, I'm sure. But the group is I mean, it's kind of a little sad. This is what it feels like to me is that it's more of a checkbox versus let's move it box. And I want us to really hope that you can become a legend out of the box again, to find better ways to serve to serve families in our community. So I appreciate you guys jumping in and volunteer
to that wouldn't be possible for me to have one or both of my juvenile supervisors, you know, assist Nicole, she's going to sit on that I mean, to provide the day to day stuff that we're dealing with, instead of the global view things, I think it would make more sense to have some of the people that, you know, are not necessarily in the weeds, but close to the weeds versus the 30,000 foot view. So at least for the maybe the initial meetings or something.
I think that makes sense. And I might throw out there, Greg, I still think you mean, we've had conversations in the past, there's an intersection between child welfare and adult probation, that I think there's an opportunity for us to do better in the community as well. So maybe even somebody from the adult side that has been serving a population of adult probationers that also have kids that you're aware of. Sure.
Okay, is there more input in this area?
I feels like maybe if we state the goals, and so it feels like a review of the mission, kind of the goals, the purpose? And then also I would throw on there maybe looking at those outcomes that we have listed those 11 Is there stuff that we should keep? I mean, do we keep them all we want them all should be add to take away so I think that would be valuable as part of that network group's work.
You could probably update the history a little bit fields.
I think in the history, it might be good to have an emphasis on the data collection because I don't think that was strongly emphasized in there. Yeah. Okay.
So I think we have time, dad.
I was thinking, nope, this is gonna get pushed again to June, which is fine. I'm not going to drive
ready. You can do a practice this month and you're going out doing a presentation in DC next month, or no.
It's a lot, but that's okay. So I'm just going to do myself just a bit of a level set in terms of the supportive family stronger community grant. So we received a five year federal grant in 2019, to support early intervention and prevention of child maltreatment. The first year of that grant was really spent creating the implementation plan. So from first year, it was all about how are we going to we wrote the proposal now, how are we going to actually put it into action? And CSU Social Work Research Center is our partner for our evaluation and outcomes as well. So we spent time the first year just writing how are we going to do this? What's it going to look like? As well as what will the evaluation and outcomes look like? So we implemented actually got to start this project in Oh, yep. 2020, which was, as that just mentioned, everything COVID. So totally changed our our plans to some degree about how we were going to implement this. But we forged ahead. In April of let me think about this 2021, we got to start a pilot, or actually, excuse me, February 2021. to April, we got to pilot the project, the evaluation plan had not yet been approved. So we got to pilot the project to just give it a start. And then we actually started the project live. April 1 of 2021. So we have actually been doing direct work with families, partner agencies since 2021. So it became and so much of this has changed over time, because one of the things I will say when we were talking about the the purpose and goals of LCI O G, one of the things that came to my mind is the need to be flexible. When things change, as you were talking about bills coming and going and circumstances changing for kids and families and just the trajectory of the mental health and well being of children, youth and families. We've had to be really flexible about how we do this work to support families in early intervention and prevention. So Marcy, am I able to share screen? Yeah. Let me so just given some of the history behind so I'm opening up my presentation here since we have so many of them. So just a little bit, like I said history about the project we have, since then. So again, the goal of want to start this session talk and do this at the same time. See, unfortunately, it makes me lose my screen from all of you. So I'm going to try to share my screen are you all able to see this presentation? Okay. So as I mentioned, here's the title of our of our project, which was another event to say the least. What where we are at in the process now is really continuing to work across our partner agencies and with families to serve them in a way that is really meaningful to them, and in a way that is driven by families and not by us. So the overarching goal of this project is really again, early intervention to prevent child maltreatment, to create partnerships across our community so that we better understand who offers work and how we can work together to prevent child maltreatment. And then really was seeking to engage families with lived expertise in this work because they are the ones receiving the services. Therefore, they need to be the ones to help us understand how to best support them. We the eligibility requirements for families to work with our project are initially we had picked two zip codes, and quickly realized that that was it was a barrier for our partners and families. And it also felt like it was pretty inequitable across not to be able to serve families across the community. So in January of 2022, we were able to move the project to the entire community. So any family with a child at least one child under the age of 18, that resides in Larimer County, and that doesn't have an open child welfare case. So it's pretty broad. Families can be undocumented. It can be kinship, families, birth families, grandparents, families, it doesn't matter. There's no requirement for eligibility beyond that. So Hopefully lots of ways for us to be able to serve families. We have four navigators Mary Tomas, Rod and Elise Elise was hired as we expanded to the whole county we hired the first three initially. And then we added Elise as we expanded the zip code to include families in the whole county. Their role is really to provide resources and referrals to families, if they would prefer and choose to have case management services, we will offer case management services to them. We use the protective factor survey to really assess their strengths and their needs, trying to help those with lived expertise have a voice and how things, how services are provided to them, and then coordinating with our partner agencies to serve families. Mary and Tomas are both bilingual their primary language is Spanish, Tomas was an undocumented citizen, a resident, so he has been through that process and has a lot of knowledge about how to navigate that world. Ron is from Iraq. And he speaks Arabic. That's his primary language. And Elise comes Thank you, Pat, from foothills gateway. So she has that early, early childhood experience. So they're very diverse. They all have some lived expertise, which we have found, not surprisingly, but has been one of the most beneficial things to this project. Because when someone says, You can't understand what I've been through one of these probably can say, Yes, I do understand. And or I have, I know someone who does. So it's been great to have them. And I say this repeatedly. And I will say it until I'm not here anymore. Those four people teach me more every day than anybody ever has in this in this work because of their lives expertise. And through their lens, I see things so very differently. And this is my 35th year in child welfare. So just took me a long time to learn.
So a couple of things. So we celebrated Child Abuse Prevention Month in our awards ceremony, and dad got all choked up because she was talking about the amazingness of her team and I just to point out those amazing pictures. It's how fun of an agency we have is that was that Iraqi annual picnic last year, there are pictures that they had, they're all dressed up in their fun hats.
I'm going backwards. Computer oh yeah,
this was that. That was that those top three were from our picnic last year. So we we celebrated with lots of hats and ties and other stuff. How to Add a PE
do not want professional headshots, they were very, what does that say about me as a person working with a family who's really struggling. They were very adamant. And one other little thing that we changed again, this is what I mean about the flexibility. We had. Our business cards were our traditional human services, business cards, and giving those to families. It says children, youth and families, their mechanic primary human services, they said this is not working. So we were able to change them and put our logo on it. There is a Larimer County logo on the back. But it just something as simple as just not having that be the front facing. Picture, I think that that folks saw was extremely important. So again, having to be a little bit flexible has been really important. This may be really hard to see. So I'm just going to highlight some of the major achievements of our project thus far. And I should say this goes until September of 2024. So we are really as much work as we put into it's hard to believe we're like at the backside of this. But so just just for some highlights, I already mentioned the zip code expansion since we were launched. So that was as of April 21 2021, we have had 377 families referred to our project, we had screened in and successfully contacted 305 of those families. And in the way that the navigators have served them. 68 of those families were what we call high intensity, which means beyond 90 days, 71 of those families worldwide intensity, which would be from 30 days to 90 days, 108 families had community connections, that means we connected them to some community partners, but they didn't need that case management service. And 68 of those families told us they didn't really need. They weren't they weren't good with it. They, they they would just get the phone call. We've had great relationship building across our community. We have done so much work in connecting our community partners together. So we have a navigation meeting that's two times a month that connects partner agencies and we have over 35 agencies represented that just come and share a little bit about what their agency is doing. If they have needs that they can ask this group for ideas about how to better serve the sheriff. They've got events coming up. It's just been a great place to share information. We have done numerous outreach activities which have been like community barbecue events back to school nights, we host parent resource nights at one of the schools in Thompson School District, housing resource fairs. The team did these amazing Christmas baskets one year. So it's been really pretty cool to see all the things that they have continued to do when that will happen. I mentioned bringing lived expertise to the field, I've told I think I've said this maybe before here, but we had to really challenge our traditional hiring practices and child welfare, because these folks do not have did not have a degrees in Human Services. And some even have some history with child welfare. And previously, we would never have been able to hire those people in this work. And so we are really trying to change how we look at bringing those with the expertise, because again, I'm not I'm really not kidding when I say I have learned so much from them and have really been herbalized. That's not a word. But in terms of how I used to practice in the field of child welfare, I just wish I had had their knowledge, then
would have really helped me.
I mentioned using the protective factor survey, we've got really good communication going on, we've on boarded a whole lot of agencies across our community, we have really active website, I'm trying to remember the number we've had over, oh, shoot, I can't remember 300 some hits on our website, and I can't remember how many have stayed longer. So that's been helpful. One of the areas that we have been tracking is the number of families referred to us if they have had previous Child Welfare history or not. It used to be when we first started over 75% of the referrals had previous history. And then somewhere below began, but it has begun to shift. And now we have 60% of families have not had Child Welfare history and 40% have. So we're starting to shift that. So that now we're actually can say we're doing a little bit more preventative work before when we were seeing so many who had previous involved, which is fine, that's not a problem. It's just felt like we weren't getting upstream. And we're really starting to ship that. Because of the cultural diversity of this team, we have been able to interact with our community in a way that's again, very unique and very specific to those needs of families. Rod always has probably five or more families that are Arabic only speaking families. And between Tomas and Mary, probably over three quarters of their workload is Spanish speaking family. So we're so lucky to have them. Carrie is going to do a real presentation at our annual grantee meeting. So she's not here with you today. But I'll skip past that. So just in terms of numbers, again, we do a referral episode tracking across our agency partners. As of the end of April, we've had over 2000 referrals that have been sent to partner agencies, the referral episode tracking isn't just the actual form that's submitted into CSU to keep the data on that one form, there might be five different referrals to different agencies. So the form itself has over 1200. But we've had over 2000 referrals for agencies across our partners. And again, this is just from implement our from our actual implementation start date in April to the end of April of last year of this year, sorry. We're using the protective factor survey to help us identify family strengths and family's needs. And what should be happening is based on that protective factor survey, we are referring families to the needs that they identify that is completed with families, it just not done for them. It is their language, it is their telling us what what it is that they see as going well and what they see as areas of need. We know unlike us, as all of you do that concrete supports or what families are in the most need of right now. And you'll notice on this area, we have the most concrete supports is the lowest scoring of the of the protective factor, the scoring is from one to four. And so you can see it continues to be the lowest area for families as they identify it, and their needs are the highest in that area. And you will see that the referrals, this number here are the referrals that we are sending to partner agencies to address concrete supports. So what that tells us is that we're using it effectively and aligning our referrals and support as it pertains to the protective factor survey. We've had a number of families now who we do this survey at entry. And then at three months, six months, nine months, and we've had a number of family actually families reached 12 months. So we're beginning to get a little bit of data over time, which again supports us in looking at increasing the family's protective factor. So the blue is the initial one, the average score at baseline and then the green is apt host so you can see we aside from nurturing attachment, which there's a story behind that, but I'll get to that later, we are helping families increase in their areas of protective factors, which is the bowl, one of the goals of this grant. What families tell us is that I'm not going to go into all of these, I'll tell you a little bit more here. But what families tell us is that they may have needs therapeutic needs, nurturing and attachment, mental health needs, substance use needs, but if their basic needs aren't met, met, it's really, really challenging them for them to be able to think about going to therapy to go into a group to, to addressing other areas of being so we're really trying to support families where they are they drive this bus we do not and honor what it is they say they need. So in terms, where are we going after this grant is over, we're working hard to continue the sustainability of this work, looking at funding through the state for prevention work, continuing to try to house this within the child welfare system, we're looking to hire a grant reporter. So you were mentioning, I remember he was mentioning about grants and looking at grants to support the work, we're doing the same thing. We'll continue our outreach efforts to let families in our community know that there are services available to them that are supportive, and that are really meant to address what they need, so that they can get the help they need before things become more critical, or crucial for them. And as I mentioned before, really increasing that families who have lived expertise in working with our with with families that we serve, as well as within our own department. So that was kind of a quick overview. But as you all are the oversight board for us, I think it's really important that you see the work that we're doing, and the progress that we're making. Anybody have questions, comments. Thanks, Andrea. Thanks.
Okay.
I think we need to move on, we're getting a little short on time here. So you've gotten the monthly expenditure and placement data? I unless you have questions, I don't think we need to go into depth on that. Can all business on the community conversation, update that.
But maybe what suited us is, just to give you a quick note, on the budget side, it does appear that there's going to be an ample close out from other counties. So we're going to attempt to cover as much of it through Child Welfare caught dollars and not touch the base of the 1451. Yay.
Update from that community conversation committee. We did have a meeting recently. And we took a look at, again, the feedback that was provided through all of those different conversations, we have an individual that was a participant in the conversation, we actually have three individuals that are a part of the committee. And we've had based on availability, a representative at the last couple of meetings, and the conversation really, I thought the individual that attended. The feedback was I thought Pivotal, and really helped to bring reality to the words that are on the page and just helped to shape the conversation of how we are trying to look at framing and forming the languaging in the RFP there had been a reference to really looking at creating safe space collaboration, some type of mechanism for assure that resources that exist that community members can actually access them, that there may be services available, but the barriers then trying to get individuals to those locations and those services that then also foster promote a sense of belonging and a sense of community so that people aren't feeling isolated and removed from the the ability to then partner and relationship build and feel a sense of support. So there's some really good kind of like concepts that were formulated a little bit more clearly than we'd had in the past. And a subcommittee of that work group is now going to be trying to language take the information from the last last meeting and put that into language that can be used to formulate the RFP. And then that language will be kind of vetted to the community conversation workgroup and trying to see if we can get this moving a little bit more. Kind of, it's been a long process but I think a really good process because we really are the voice of community members with the participation of some of those representatives and and helping them to get a clearer sense of what that gap what the existing gaps and needs are. So it's been it's been a little longer than anticipated but valuable. So we're making some headway. It's just taken us some time to make sure we were doing well, and respecting the information that had been provided.
Are there any questions for sir?
Well, thank you for the update. Certainly. We have planned for our spotlight to be on next time with early childhood counsel presentation. And I think that we'll get that on the agenda for I think, will there be in the next time versus in August? It says August only.
So we generally don't hold a July meeting. Oh, you're right. It's only may come in. I'm ready to get into summer. Let's go.
So I think that can be a June update.
I think I think if I remember i Christina was thinking August might be a better timeline.
Oh, well, if if that's what Christina thought, then we'll do that. In I think two
I think June without doing I think maybe leaving the space not having the spotlight in June because I think we can dive in a little more on the conversations we had about the mission vision and all those kinds of things. Right.
That sounds good. Is there any other old business? I think I skipped new business. Is there any new business? Okay,
I just wanted to update the group that Nicole is going to start jointly supervising the juvenile team with me she's actually going to take over the responsibility of supervising Tracy Stromberg and I will do Dixie down in Loveland. So, we just announced that change to the whole management team at a retreat last month, and so she will be more involved in juvenile programming going forward. Jointly. Thanks for the update. Good.
Any other new business? Hey, I would I accept a motion to adjourn. Motion to adjourn. Okay, meetings adjourned. Thank you, everyone. We will see you in June, everybody. Thanks, everyone.
