In part, it's because workers in these places have more time to find the children in real danger who really must be taken from their parents. But it's also because most of the children seen by caseworkers are not who we think they are. Contrary to the common stereotype, most parents who lose their children to foster care are neither brutally abusive nor hopelessly addicted. Far more common are cases in which a family's poverty has been confused with child neglect. 133 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 Several studies have found that 30 percent of America's foster children could be home right now if their parents just had decent housing. And single parents desperate to keep their low-wage jobs when the sitter doesn't show may have to choose between staying home and getting fired or going to work and having their children taken on lack of supervision charges. Other cases fall on a broad continuum between the extremes. The parents neither all victim nor all villain. What these cases have in common is the fact that there are a wide variety of proven programs that can keep these children in their own homes and do it with a far better track record for safety than foster care. And we must never forget how harmful and how dangerous foster care itself can be, particularly foster care with strangers. When a child is needlessly thrown into foster care, he is 134 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 cut loose from everyone loving and familiar. For a young enough child, it can be an experience akin to a kidnapping. The emotional trauma can last a lifetime. One recent study of foster care alumni found they had twice the rate of post-traumatic stress disorder of Gulf War veterans and only percent could be 11 said to be doing well. 12 Another study found that even 13 infants born with cocaine in their 14 systems did better when left with mothers 15 able to care for them than they did when 16 placed in foster care. For the foster 17 children, the separation from the mothers 18 was more toxic than the cocaine. 19 A third study found that on 20 average foster care is such an inherently toxic intervention that even children who were equally maltreated but left in their own homes with little or no help fared better than children thrown into foster care. 135 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 All that harm can occur even when the foster home is a good one. The majority are. But the rate of abuse in foster care is far higher than generally realized and far higher than in the general population. That same alumni study found that one-third of foster children said they'd been abused by a foster parent or another adult in a foster home. Switching to orphanages won't help. The record of institutions is even worse. None of this means no child should ever be taken away. Of course there are children so brutalized in their own homes that the only option is to take the child and never look back. One of your colleagues today described a personal experience with such a case. But there are far fewer such children than generally believed, and the odds of finding them go down during a foster care panic. 136 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 My written testimony discusses the other half of the equation, the need to open the doors. We offer a transparency agenda for Philadelphia child welfare and a series of other solutions to the problems now plaguing the system. I would be pleased to discuss this with you and especially since, again, I have to disagree in part with Mr. Cervone. I believe the framework he is suggesting or seems to be getting at does not go nearly far enough. And I'd be pleased to answer any other questions you may have. Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you very much. I'll telling you, it's --
I'm glad that Madam Chair insisted that you come back so that we could hear your testimony.
It just 137 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 goes to show you this whole issue is very complex and there are no quick-fix answers to the situation that families find themselves in, and I think you point out, like Cheryl did, the societal issues that impact on families and that we have to find a way to address them. And certainly we have always in Philadelphia promoted the idea of keeping the child in the home, and I hope this panic of taking the children -- because the social workers do feel the way you cited, that it may be their next case, because they have to make those judgments. So I hope the panic will not continue. You said that the danger of foster care is particularly acute with strangers. What about when children are placed with their own families, such as we support kinship care here in Philadelphia?
That is a much, much better option. When you look, for example, at that Minnesota study I 138 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 mentioned that talked about how even the children who were equally maltreated and left in their own homes did better than the foster children, that was better than the foster children placed with strangers, what should best be called stranger care. Kinship care is still foster care, but it cushions the blow. Those Minnesota children left with kinship care did not do worse. Similarly, there are a number of other studies which show that kinship care placements are not only more stable, better for a child's emotional well-being, they are on average safer than stranger care. It's very important to emphasize that, because it's very easy to take cheap shots at kinship care, to use assumptions like, well, if the -- because of the same assumptions against the poor parents may extend to poor grandparents and people will jump to conclusions. We know that kinship 139 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 placements are on average safer. Allegheny County, of all their placements, not just all their family placements, nearly half are with relatives.
Now, in the kinship care model, does the support, the financial support, follow the child?
No. That's a huge problem. The way things are set up now -- and this is because of federal regulations and also the failure of states to step up to the plate to make up for it. The federal regulations say the following: If grandma wants to take in her grandchild, she can get the same kind of payment that a total stranger would get, but only if grandma becomes a licensed foster parent. Now, the problem with that is, the licensing requirements very often are geared to middle-class creature comforts, not necessarily health and safety. So if mom is poor, grandma is probably also 140 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 poor, and she may not be able to afford, say -- and I'm not saying these are the specific Pennsylvania regulations, but many states say a separate bedroom for every foster child, a minimum amount of square footage and so on. There are two ways to deal with this. Allegheny County's approach has been to move heaven and earth to get the kin licensed, provide the help to expand the housing, provide whatever they need. And they have managed to do this within the licensing restrictions. New Jersey has taken the approach of also -- I think they're also pushing for licensing, but they're also saying, If you can't get licensed, we'll make up the difference between, say, what you might have gotten on an AFDC child-only grant and what the federal government would pay you if you were a total stranger. We will reach into our own pockets in the state treasury and make up the difference, because it's that 141 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 important to promote kinship care. I recommend both approaches.
I'd like to just say for the record, you're absolutely correct in that Pennsylvania has fallen short to date of bridging the gap for kinship care providers, but the good news on the horizon is that State Senator Anthony Hardy Williams and State Representative Rosita Youngblood have -- Senator Williams actually has a bill in the State Senate where he's looking to garner support to make that bridge. So some attention is there, but ultimately you need adequate votes to make it real.
We started the whole issue of kinship care some years back. And when Ms. Hardy comes 142 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 back, we'll ask you about the whole kinship care program on the state, because we thought that the check followed the child and not to the parent here in Pennsylvania. So we'll talk about that.
No. As you say, if you're a total stranger, you will get a specified amount, but by federal regulation, if you are an unlicensed grandparent, you can't get that same amount.
So if the State makes an effort or gets the money to follow the child, will Pennsylvania be able to do that in lieu of this federal guideline?
The State is free to reach into its own pocket and make up the difference. Absolutely free to do that. The catch is, it's going to come out of the state treasury.
So my suggestion 143 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 is to approach it two ways, make a concerted effort to do what Allegheny County has done and get the grandparents and other relatives licensed, but also make up the difference when that can't happen.
You stated in your testimony, "two months ago the Philadelphia child welfare system had very serious problems. Certainly it was better than it was ten years ago, but much work remains to be done." Let's talk about the two months ago. Talk about that.
Okay. Well, one of the things that reflects the fact that much work remains to be done is the fact that almost -- by the way, Philadelphia is not unusual. Those systems that take away fewer kids and have better safety outcomes, they're the ones who have managed to succeed at concerted efforts to reform. So that if you looked at San 144 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 Francisco, it would be about the same as Philadelphia in terms of its rate of child removal. Akron, Ohio would be higher. Columbus, Ohio would be in the stratosphere. So all child welfare systems have very serious problems, even the ones that I call "national models" are national models not because they're where they need to be, but because they're so much better than most of the rest of them.
And cite some examples real quick, national model examples.
Yeah. The child welfare system in the State of Illinois, state run. Not because they don't have serious problems, but because they are doing better than most of the country. The State of Alabama, thanks to a class-action lawsuit -- co-counsel for the plaintiffs was one of my Board members. They brought a class-action 145 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 lawsuit. The Director of the Alabama system at the time, a man named Paul Vincent, welcomed the suit, used it as a chance to leverage resources and make reforms, and the consent decree involved rebuilding the system to emphasize keeping families together. They have done -- again, many problems remain, but significant advantage. And one reason it's important to mention Alabama, by the way, is, the person who was running the Alabama system at the time is a guy named Paul Vincent. He now helps other systems around the country to reform. He's done it in New York. He's the court monitor in Utah. In 2002, he came to Philadelphia and wrote a comprehensive report on revamping the training for supervisors in DHS. That report has been sitting on a shelf for four years. I haven't seen it, but knowing who wrote it, I'll bet it's pretty good. So one of the things I suggest 146 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 in my written testimony is take that report off the shelf and start implementing it.
Just one more. I will indeed read your testimony page by page. You mention the Minnesota study. You reference it. Are there details in here where one can actually get all the background on that?
If I can get from one of the staff your card, I will e-mail the actual study to you. There is a citation in there, but it --
Could you please make sure that the Chair of the Committee gets that, and she'll make sure that all of us do. I'd be very, very much interested in that.
One other question. Have you met with anyone at the Inquirer since their stories?
I asked to. I've 147 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 been here. I was able to meet with Commissioner Evans. I was able to meet with a wonderful group of union stewards and supervisors, who were very dedicated and were very impressive. I e-mailed, I think, most of the Inquirer reporters who have written most of the stories and asked if I could meet them while I was in town. Some of them said they were too busy. Some did not respond at all. Now, they have certainly received a number of e-mails from me. One reporter referred to them as harangues.
Harangues. But I think even if one has communicated by e-mail, there's nothing like a person-to-person meeting.
Well, maybe you won't get it this week today. You might get it tomorrow. If the panic ends, you say Philadelphia will be taking away more 148 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 children than other cities. What can be done about that?
And in your conversation, maybe I don't want to give up your conversation with Dr. Evans, but maybe you can share with us some of the discussion.
Well, one of the things would be to restore -- it is my understanding that there were a number of good ideas started up in recent years, and somehow they tend to fall by the wayside. For some reason, in the past Philadelphia child welfare seems to have been the place where good ideas went to die. For example, the family-to-family program, an initiative of the NEKC Foundation, which also funds my organization. As I understand it, Philadelphia was a family-to-family site, but it appears to have kind of withered away. I'm not saying it may not exist in some form in some way, but there's a 149 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 tendency for the model programs to be diluted. Intensive family preservation services underwent a similar phenomenon. One of the Alabama reforms --
That was our kinship care program, the family preservation.
Okay. Let me be -- well, I'm very glad you raised that, because it's very important to understand this. The term "family preservation" was originally invented about 32 years ago to apply to one specific type of intervention, something called intensive family preservation services based on a model called Home Builders in Washington state. One of the biggest mistakes the family preservation movement made was this: Home Builders is a trademark. The term "family preservation" isn't. So it can be slapped onto anything and everything. So when I speak of an intensive family 150 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 preservation services program, I'm speaking of that specific program, which Philadelphia also did have. It may even still have in some form, but probably, again, as a shell of its former self. In Alabama, they use something called flex funds, which means just what it sounds like, a small pool of money that a caseworker can use for a given family for anything that particular family needs, and it is amazing how much that one small infusion can leverage. My understanding is, Philadelphia once had it. Again, it's tended to fall by the wayside. So you can look at reviving those programs. You can bring that plan that Paul Vincent wrote off the shelf. And one last item, it tends not to be thought of as a DHS responsibility, bolster due process protections for families. Right now in most cases a birth parent who is accused and whose child has already been taken, you're at 151 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 that 72-hour hearing, they can walk in with a cardboard cutout wearing a three-piece suit and get about as much representation as most birth parents get now, simply because you are talking about overwhelmed, probably underpaid what are called panel attorneys, with no 9 institutional provider, no institutional support. Now, there are some cases that are handled by wonderful groups like Community Legal Services where you have that, but what they do should be the norm. And that's not a matter of getting bad parents off, so to speak. What it has to do with is, if the case doesn't belong in the system, you get it out so workers are free to look for the kids in real danger. If there are real problems, you have a dedicated advocate with their own support staff to push for whatever that family really needs. Washington state has done this in several counties. It has worked so 152 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 well that even the people who prosecute parents in that state are in favor of this program now, because it gets the cases that don't need to be there out, gets the families the real help that they need. So those are some of the -- and, of course, again, the whole idea of the transparency agenda.
My final question I'd like to close around Dr. Evans around, parenting workshops, whether or not that should be a criterion for when a child is returned to their natural family and/or this flex -- what did you call it?
Flex funds. Might incentives be a useful tool in helping parents -- and then I'm including myself in that so-called well-informed parents who are looking for the best methods in raising children. Should incentives be used prior to a 153 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 child returning to their natural family?
Okay. Couple of things. First, I would not -- the key to flex funds is using them at the very beginning of the intervention. So I don't think it would work as that kind of an incentive. You want to go right in and deal with the immediate pressing problems. I would also be reluctant on the other point, because paradoxically, one of the problems you tend to have in many child welfare systems now is, no 19 matter what the real problem is, you tend to see what would have been aptly called cookie-cutter service plans. Every plan says get counseling, get parent education, go to counseling, get parent education. Now, in many cases I'm sure that makes sense, but the key to real 154 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 reform is custom tailoring the plan to whatever that family really needs. So, therefore, there's nothing I would -- almost nothing I would favor in absolutely every case. Also, if you're going to do the parent education, it's a lot more effective if it's done as part of one of those intensive family preservation services programs, because then you have somebody who is combining hard services and concrete help with who is also qualified as a therapist to provide this kind of parenting education. If a family sees that somebody can deliver real help, they're going to be more receptive to the counseling. So that, for example, in one of these models, the counseling -- and the parent education may be done while mom and the therapist are fixing a hole in the wall, repairing a broken window, scrubbing the floor. They're combining the two. So that tends to make them both more effective. 155 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867
Before you leave, could you briefly tell us about your agency and how you got started so we can put you in perspective. You did not have an opportunity to do that. We have the information here, but for the record, briefly.
Yeah. I am a former journalist. I covered my first child welfare story 30 years ago and I met a young woman. She was a college student. She had been in nine different foster homes by the time she was nine years old. She had emerged an extraordinarily articulate advocate because she had managed to keep the rage bottled up inside her, as she says, unlike my five brothers who have been in every jail in New York state. And I came out of talking to her 30 years ago with three conclusions: I was really glad I had chosen journalism as a career; I knew I would keep coming back to the story; 156 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 and if we just get rid of all those no-good birth parents and get all these kids adopted, everything will be fine. Well, two out of three is not bad. Now, I didn't reach that third conclusion because the former foster child said it. It was just the conclusion I jumped to. But after years of coming back to the story, I kept finding that piece was wrong. The facts on the ground weren't matching what the most widely quoted experts kept saying. So I learned there was a wider range of expertise out there. And when this dichotomy became too much to bear between what I was seeing as a reporter and what I was hearing from some groups of experts, I wrote a book about all this. That was 1990. That prompted a call from a wonderful woman I had covered when I was a reporter in Massachusetts, Elizabeth Vorenberg. She was a member of the National Board of the ACLU at the time. She said, You want to try to form 157 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 an organization around the principles in your book? I said, Sure. She got an initial organizing grant, and a mere eight years later, we got sufficient foundation support for me to take the only job I ever held that involves neither committing acts of journalism nor teaching others to do so.
Focus of our organization is to try to reform child welfare systems, to improve child safety by keeping more families together.
Spectacular. It's a long difficult process. I'm so glad you mentioned the no quick-fix piece of this, because it is very difficult, and one of the most important things as you embark upon this process here is to constantly monitor for results, but 158 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 expect it's going to take several years to get them. The success rate? We actually tend to work through by trying to change media coverage. So in some places, we've been quite successful. In others, notably less so. But I would point to, for example, the State of Maine where not because of us alone but because after a child known to the system died in a foster home -- when children die -- there's a double standard. If the death is in his own home, people always think, Oh, it must be doing too much to keep families together. If the child dies in foster care, it's, Oh, it's a technical thing, fix the licensing standards and the background checks. Well, we persuaded Maine media to look at the fact that that state was taking away -- or had in foster care on any given day more kids than almost any other state in the nation. And Maine is not the child abuse capital of America. 159 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 So when the media were willing to look at this, the public officials followed, and when a new Governor came in, he brought in a new reform-minded administration, and working together with a wonderful foster parent who had become fed up with the fact that so many of the foster children she was seeing could have remained in their own homes, she organized the grassroots, and today the State of Maine takes away 30 percent fewer children than it did five years ago. They've doubled the proportion in kinship care, and they've done it without compromising safety. We sure as heck didn't do that, but we working with these other groups, I think, were pivotal in that. We accomplished more modest success, but some reductions in Missouri as well.
Thank you so much for coming up, and we will certainly share your testimony with all members of the Committee and actually 160 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 with all members of City Council, because we will have our budget hearings beginning in February and the Department will come back and certainly the same issues will be discussed at that time. And so we appreciate your taking time to come up. Thank you very much.
What I'd like for you to do, you do have a lot of details about process --
Well, I'd like you if you could try and sum up and just give us a little bit about DHS and what is your role to try to help the local office with some of the issues, 161 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 because you have a lot of the people in here who know your process and we can read that. So we appreciate that.
And I'm not going to be nearly as eloquent as he was. I always end up in this position. Somebody sings ahead of me and then I go. But let me see what I can do to cut down on some of this.
If you go to and talk about your policy on death abuse, that would be helpful.
Yeah. Why don't I do that, which is actually where I left off. One of the things that our report actually produced this last year for 2005 was that statewide 40 children died as a result of abuse or neglect. Seventy-five percent of those deaths were of children under the age of five, and parents were the most frequent perpetrators of those deaths. And of those 40 child deaths, 21 of the families 162 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 with a child death were known to a county child welfare agency. For the City of Philadelphia, there were deaths in 2005. 6 Let me see if I can't cut some 7 of this crap out of here, because it's 8 going to sound so bureaucratic, and go to 9 some of the things that I've heard that 10 have been raised by some of the other -- 11
-- some of the 14 other people. 15 The one thing that's important 16 to understand in Pennsylvania is that -- 17 and I don't know if this is necessarily how it will always remain, but that is that it is a state-administered, county-operated system. So we've got 67 counties that are basically doing their own services. I have visited 60 of those 67 counties and I believe that a county-operated system is a system that 163 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 can more focus on how children -- the needs of the children, because, believe me, all 67 counties are very different and they all need to be very creative in how they provide services based on the needs of the kids in those -- the children in those particular areas. There are some specific laws that are important that I thought I should mention, and one is the Pennsylvania Child Protective Services Law, which includes the parameters for investigations. And that's the reports of suspect child abuse as well as reports of children in need of general protective services. These services include incidents where there is inadequate shelter, truancy, inappropriate discipline, hygiene issues or other issues impacting the well-being of a child. County agencies are charged with investigating these reports under 164 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 the Child Protective Services Law. Allegations of abuse are received and registered with the ChildLine. They are then forwarded to the appropriate county agency. County agencies must immediately respond to the safety of the child within hours. It's important to note that 9 the majority of the reports that come to 10 the attention of the county agencies do 11 not rise to the level of child abuse as 12 defined by law. 13 Agencies have to complete their 14 investigations between 30 and 60 days. 15 During the investigation, the caseworker 16 visits the family as often as necessary 17 in order to determine safety. 18 Let me see where else I can -- 19
If I could 20 ask you some questions, it would 21 stimulate the discussion here. 22
Because I 24 do have some. How often are the counties 165 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 evaluated?
At least once a year. What types of evaluations has Philadelphia received over the last few years and what has been the status of the license issued by the State?
That is a very good question. Actually, Philadelphia has had a fairly good track record in the last two years now. My position, I've been the Deputy for two of those evaluations. So I've signed off on two evaluations for Philadelphia. In both of them there were no, what I would call, serious types of issues related to the licensing. There's always issues, because we're very -- we're bureaucrats and that's our job, to figure out what are the counties not doing that are in the regulations. But both of the licensing visits required corrective actions, which were provided by Philadelphia 166 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 immediately, and the corrective action plans were accepted by the Department of Public Welfare. I think one of the things that we haven't been as good at as we should be, and that's following up on those corrective action plans. I think that we've been less of a good partner to DHS than we might be by not perhaps holding their feet to the fire on those kinds of bureaucratic issues, when the most important things for them to do is to take care of the safety of kids. But at the same time, in those corrective actions, there are things that need to be implemented, not just because of the regulations but because it's good practice. So the last two there have been corrective actions. They were submitted timely and there were no major deficiencies that were in those licensing -- they're called licensing inspection systems. 167 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 Did that answer your question?
That's fine, but the inspection, which goes into the issuance of the license, would your inspection have identified the problems with the provider?
It looks at all of the regulatory requirements that are issued. And I actually have with me, because these are public information, the last two licensing corrective action plans. So if that's something that the Council would be interested in having, that is public information. We talk about non-transparency, but that is public information. And they look at all sorts of things. I was actually going to bring this up with me, because it's very specific, very bureaucratic the kinds of things they look at. I'll just pull the most recent one out for you, give you kind of a sense of the things that we look at when we come in. 168 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 We look at the areas around placement and whether the placement records that are reviewed are accurate and complete. And that's a certain part of the chapter in the regulations that we look at. We do a lot of record review stuff to make sure that what is required by the law is included in there, like family service plans are updated and that they're signed and that the parents have signed them and the parents have seen them. We don't look at the -- we have a list of the agencies that are contracted by the City, but the contracting between the City and the agencies is really between the City and the agencies.
Do the agencies have to be licensed by the 169 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 State?
There are certain agencies that do have to be licensed by the State, and there are some that don't have to be licensed by the State. One of the agencies, unless they do services other than the SCOH services, they are not licensed by the State of Pennsylvania. Now, if they do other services that are other than the in-home SCOH services, then they do have to be licensed. So if they're doing --
So you're saying the SCOH service providers are not licensed by the State?
If that's the only thing they do. If that's the only service that they provide.
But if they do other services, you don't review the SCOH services; you do the other stuff?
That's correct. That's correct. And it's one of the 170 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 things that we've thought about since this, whether it wouldn't be helpful to the counties, particularly to Philadelphia, for us to take a look at developing some kind of a licensing criteria or standard. Now, the counties have that. I mean, they have contracts with the agencies, and there are standards in their contracts, but we don't do the licensing or the certifications of those providers.
Now, do other counties in the State contract with providers like Philadelphia?
Yes. It's the same thing. Matter of fact, when -- I'm not sure if it was Dr. Wexler, but when Mr. Wexler was talking about Allegheny County, it sounded a little bit like he was talking about it as another state in itself and that it does things that Philadelphia couldn't do, and that isn't true. Philadelphia and Allegheny are 171 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 bound by the same kinds of regulations as it relates to kinship care, as he had mentioned. So that things that are being done in Allegheny County around kinship care can be done in Philadelphia around kinship care as well. So those are the kinds of things we look at. It unfortunately as I look through this over the last year and becoming familiar with it, it has a tendency of being a little more bureaucratic than practice-oriented, and one of the things I think that we need to do -- and we have to do it based on the law, of course -- is take a step back and look at some of the practices as well so that we can be more helpful to the counties and say, In this county this is some of the good practice that is occurring, you might want to think about doing this in your county as well. But those are basically the licensing -- so we go through the adoption services -- and, by the way, you 172 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 had no violations on adoption services. We go through the general protective services. We basically just go through the regulations and say yes or no. Protective services, are you following the requirements in the protective services. And like I said, over the last two years, the LIS's for Philadelphia were not anything to be concerned about.
What are some of the child abuse rates in other counties in the State and are there counties relative to their population that have maybe higher death rate or child abuse rates than Philadelphia?
Well, if we're talking about deaths rates, I mean, you guys are huge.
You're 54 percent of our system. So when I give you the statistics about 40 deaths and you having 173 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 percent -- or 17 out of those 40 deaths in 2005, it really isn't -- I mean, that isn't out of whack for the State and for the deaths that occur. Unfortunately, what I left on the train was the annual report, but I do have one that I can leave with you.
That goes through a 11 lot of statistics based on all the 12 different counties, with a lot of 13 information on there that you can do a 14 comparison based on what you would like 15 to know instead of me telling you. 16
Well, are 17 there some counties that have higher death rates than Philadelphia?
I know it's all relative, but if you have a county with 17,000 people where you have a death rate of 50 kids, that's --
No. It really is 174 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 based on the percentage. I mean, here out of 40 isn't even 50 percent, but yet the number of kids that you serve in your system are much, much higher than that percentage of deaths. I think Allegheny -- I'm looking here to see. Allegheny County may be the next -- no, it's not.
Erie County 13 struggles as well, and they've had the 14 same kinds of issues, and we've been 15 working with them on the same kinds of 16 issues. So Erie County is a little out 17 of whack for the number of kids that they serve. As it relates to abuse cases, you guys have the most abuse cases, but it's not out of whack with a city your size and the kinds of services you're providing and the poverty that exists in the area. One of the points that I 175 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 thought Mr. Wexler made that was really well is, the bottom line for a lot of these families is the poverty that they live in, and until something is done about that, there's not going to be a whole lot of improvement in the outcomes for some of these children. So I will leave this for you.
And if you would like copies of the licensing reviews, just let me know. I'll be glad to provide that as well.
I would like to, just because we talked a lot about transparency, I'd like to skip back -- well, first, before we go there, for death reviews, there are some very basic things that the Department of Public Welfare does, and it's in my testimony.
We'll put 176 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 that in the record.
There are four different types of processes that we go through for death reviews, and you can read that yourselves, but I'd like to talk a little bit about the transparency issue, because the Governor has just signed into law a bill. It's actually related to our Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act. It's CAPTA. The bill 12 itself is known as Act 146, and it was signed by Governor Rendell on November 9th. And this was a lot of work by a lot of people to try to create to bring Pennsylvania into some federal requirements, draw down some additional dollars, but also this law provides for the release of information. It allows for public disclosure of the findings of information about the cases of child abuse or neglect that has resulted in a child fatality or near fatality. So this will allow all of the counties to provide that information, where currently there 177 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 isn't a law that allows that. Matter of fact, there's a law that prohibits it. So that takes effect 180 days from the date of signature, and that's November 9th is when he signed it. So I did want to make sure I mentioned that, because I think that's very important.
Could you just explain to me about the kinship care program in Pennsylvania and what the law allows for children remaining with families and the resources that go with that?
I will do the best I can on this. Unfortunately, I may even ask one of my partners from Philadelphia to come up and explain it, maybe Joe. But let me take a crack at it and maybe Joe can fill in where I miss out. Kinship care is, of course, as you know, very similar to foster care, and in Pennsylvania in order to be a kinship care provider, you do have to be licensed as a foster care provider. 178 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 I'm not sure -- I mean, that's been in the law. I'm not sure it isn't something we couldn't look at based on some of the information that Mr. Wexler provided. But a kinship care family does receive what a foster care family would have received for that child.
In Pennsylvania, yes. Yes. So when you talk about the money following the child, I'm not sure exactly what you mean by -- you didn't just ask that question, but I heard you mention it before.
Well, in 1998, we had a conference here in Philadelphia on kinship care, and as a result of that, the Department opened up a grand central station where they provided support and help and information to family members who wanted to take on the raising of a family member, because with the advent of crack cocaine, we saw 179 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 a lot of mothers leave their children with family members. And at that time, the assistance check went to the parent, and we wanted to -- and I thought that the financial resources went with the child to the family. So that was a long time ago, but that's how we set it up. And I don't know if this is talking about what Mr. Wexler was talking about, the family to family or family preservation, but the Department got -- and Julia Danzy was extremely important, played a role in setting up the information department called Grand Central Station to help families understand what kinship care meant.
I happen to believe exactly what he said. I agree that kinship care is the best for children if you can find them, but I think in a lot of situations, and I'm sure here in Philadelphia, it may be difficult to find kinship care in situations when the whole 180 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 family has been in a generation of poverty forever. And a lot of times it's generational, the families that are served by DHS. But it is a better way to go. It is less traumatic for kids. And we do pay the families for kinship care, but, yes, he's right, they do have to be licensed. But Allegheny has figured out a way to do it, as he said.
Well, we'll work with Allegheny. Maybe the Commissioners will do that. Thank you very much. I have some other people who are waiting also.
-- before I go? Because I do really want to put a plug in for DHS and for the fact that I truly 181 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 believe that the DHS administrators and the staff, for the jobs that they have to do every day to protect the children and families, do an excellent job. When they were talking earlier about firemen, policemen and child welfare workers having the toughest jobs, I'm not so sure I'd put it in that order. I think that being a child welfare worker in this country is one of the most difficult jobs you could possibly have and sometimes one of the most thankless. So I really do want to mention that and say what a good partner DHS has been with us. We sometimes make their lives very difficult, but in spite of that, they really have partnered with us well. So I wanted to make sure I said that.
Well, we thank you, and we've been here a long time and have worked with DHS, and they've come a long way, and we are proud of them, too, on what they do. 182 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867
And the other thing I created when I started was an advisory cabinet, and Philadelphia was one of the counties that sat on my cabinet. Cheryl Ransom-Garner was one of the members of my advisory cabinet, and now I'm looking to DHS to provide another member.
Let me now have Rita Urwitz, Tamara Askew and Kahim Boles. Thank you so much for being patient. I don't know if you're familiar with the hearing process here in City Council, but with the questions, it gets pretty long, so we ask you to come prepared and bring your lunch.
I think we're 183 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 prepared.
Okay. Good afternoon. Whoever is going to begin first, please identify yourself for the record.
Good afternoon. My name is Tamara Washington-Askew.
Nice to meet you. Would you like to proceed with your testimony?
Yes. Good afternoon, Madam Chairperson and members of the City Council. My name is Tamara Washington-Askew. I am employed as a Social Worker II within the Department of Human Services. I have been with the agency three months shy of eight years. In those years, I have worked in three sections. The first section I worked in was in the General Intake section. The Intake section is fast paced in regards of keeping time mandates with the State 184 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 of Pennsylvania. In this particular section, a social worker has to be able to investigate Child Protective Service and General Protective Service allegations of abuse and neglect, assess for safety, secure safety if needed and document findings, complete several required forms and determine the case between 30 or 60 days. This is easier said than done, because social workers may encounter barriers or obstacles that may prevent the case from being closed or transferred for services within the mandated time frame. Cases are not assigned one at a time in Intake. When I worked in the Intake Unit for three years, I received eight to ten cases a month. There were four Child Protective Service cases assigned on an emergency day. I was expected to transfer or close eight to ten cases as fast as they were assigned. I managed to keep a low caseload. However, it was very stressful mentally, 185 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 emotionally and physically. In Intake, you see the full gamut of poverty and/or abuse and neglect in families. As a social worker with compassion, I felt compelled to save and help everyone. However, often times I could not, for whatever reason and efforts that were made. But I could not dwell on the families/children that refused to be helped or the judges or child advocates that refused to see the whole picture. Sometimes I felt like "who am I? " And for what? Only to get my testimony thrown out of the window, especially in a courtroom. If one chooses to get stuck there, it makes the job more stressful. So you have to keep on and move on and keep investigating, transferring or closing cases. I often did not sleep because 186 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 some cases kept me second-guessing my determination. I would ask myself sometimes why. How could a family be made stable on one day, only to be in a complete crisis the next day? I had to keep telling myself that I am not God and I do not have a crystal ball. I made the best decision I could make, considering all the factors involved at that time. I was asked by my Director at the time to consider working in the specialized section of Sex Abuse Intake. I worked in this section for three years. I also received a series of training for this section. Working in the Sex Abuse section was not as challenging as General Intake, in my opinion. In this section I was supported by a team that consisted of DHS supervisors, DHS administrators, medical personnel from Children's Hospital and St. Christopher's Hospital for Children, the Special Victims Unit, Philadelphia Children's Alliance and the 187 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 District Attorney's office. I felt as though I was making a difference in the lives of the victims and the non-offender caretakers. This was rewarding, because my efforts to provide safety and render support and services did not go in vain. I was able to earn the respect from DHS management as well as child advocates and the judges for my efforts. But this was in the capacity of working in the Sex Abuse Unit, in a specialty unit. Currently, I am in the Family Preservation section. I get to be a part of helping to preserve the lives of children and their families. It is refreshing to be able to see a family go from a helpless crisis mode to a feeling of empowerment within 12 weeks. Often times the families are not given a second chance. Family Preservation Services gives the family a second chance to get it together.
Instead of dwelling on their past mistakes the family has made, 188 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 we are able to build on the strengths of the family and enhance them. I was also a parent action network co-facilitator. In this capacity, I was able to give back to the parents what I have learned over the years and help them. These parents were able to graduate from the group with a feeling of accomplishment of learning how to be a more effective parent. Although I can only speak for myself, however, I can speak to the job in which the social workers at DHS are expected and required to perform. The majority of us work very, very, very hard, without question. Most of our good deeds go unnoticed and unknown to the public, administration, the court personnel and the press. Many of us have gone above and beyond the call of duty to secure the safety from one child to several children in one family. Many of us have sacrificed the time that we could have spent with our own biological 189 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 children. Yes, it is unfortunate when a child dies. As a social worker, a piece of us also die. It is not fair to be judged by the outside public and press. Theoretically, everything regarding policy and practice sounds great and doable, but in reality, if I have said it once, I have said it a thousand times, if you have never done this job, you will never understand. Every family is unique and has their own set of unique problems. Therefore, they should not be treated the same. The same holds true for the DHS personnel. We should not be stereotyped as an agency and be placed under the scrutiny of the world for one person's mistake without a full-scale investigation of all the factors that are involved. I thank you very much for this opportunity to testify today.
Thank you 190 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 very much. We'll wait until you all have spoken, then I have some questions.
Good afternoon, Madam Chairwoman and members of Council, and thank you for this opportunity to speak to you on this important issue. My name is Kahim Boles and I am the Secretary/Treasurer of AFSCME Local 2187 as well as a social worker at the Department of Human Services in the Family Preservation Unit. I have been a social worker at DHS for ten years, of which the last seven years has been in the Family Preservation Unit. As such, I have had the opportunity to work with many clients who are in crises and in need of the most intensive services provided by the Department. I am here today to speak on behalf of the many social workers who work at the Department of Human Services. These workers have dedicated their lives to protecting the children of 191 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 Philadelphia. The workers at DHS have a very difficult task to fulfill. Many times they are asked to knock on doors that police would ask for back-up. Every year, DHS social workers will visit homes on New Year's Eve when people are intoxicated and may be armed to inquire as to the safety of their children. Yet, social workers continue in spite of the potential dangers. This clearly speaks to dedication. While we welcome this opportunity to take a good look at the way services are provided, we are very concerned about the way we have been portrayed in the media as of late. There appears to be a trend to blame the social workers for all the problems facing the Department at this time. The problems at DHS can be fixed. However, they will need resources to do this. We need to have more resources to assist our clients. Without 192 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 concrete resources, all of the visits in the world will not change the problems in the homes. Many times workers feel their job is akin to building bricks without straw. We as social workers of the Department of Human Services have a great responsibility, and we are well aware of what that means. We are also aware that we cannot let poverty be an impediment to keeping families together. However, many of the families that we work with are in need of even more resources than we are now able to provide. In the past, we were able to assist our clients with housing if that was the need. We are no 18 longer able to do this in the vast majority of cases that we have even though this may be the primary need. In fact, a large percentage of the families that we serve are in need of concrete services such as housing, rental assistance, utility assistance, job placement and drug and alcohol services. 193 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 It is our sincere hope that the final result of this process is a commitment by everyone to increase our ability to serve families. Thank you for this opportunity to offer testimony, and I would be happy to entertain any questions you have.
Good afternoon, Madam Chairwoman. Thank you for this opportunity to testify. I am Rita Urwitz, Vice-President of AFSCME Local 2186. I represent supervisors who work in the Department of Human Services, among other departments. I feel uniquely qualified to testify today because of my long history with DHS. I began my career at DHS in 1980 as a caseworker with 250 children in my caseload. Before I took leave in 2002 to work full time at the union, I was 194 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 supervising five social workers in the Family Preservation section. In fact, at that point in time, we were the Home Builders model. It was a wonderful experience, and I had the great honor to supervise Mr. Boles. It saddens me to watch what I believe to be the unwarranted Inquirer attacks on the Philadelphia Department of Human Services. The impact on an already overburdened and demoralized staff is devastating. Over the last years, DHS has 15 gone through many changes. Philadelphia 16 County offers more services and broader 17 services than other counties in 18 Pennsylvania and, in fact, in the nation. 19 Yet, it's not nearly enough. In times of 20 shrinking dollars, systems are challenged 21 to find new ways to provide services to 22 conflicted families facing complex 23 systemic issues. Most of our families 24 are impoverished. 25 Mental health services are not 195 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 always accessible. It's harder to get children into special education programs. It's very difficult, if not impossible, to access shelter services. Families are turned away after waiting all day and told to return to wherever they slept the night before. They frequently don't come back. While none of these systemic problems can excuse the death of a child, the system that is in place to protect each child and to provide support for the family is overwhelmed. Twenty-six years ago, services to children in their own homes included several hours in the home each week with a private provider social worker and a family care worker. In 2006, that same service, Level 3 SCOH, mandated two contacts during the week with no time requirement. Hopefully that will change. I am not sure of how or when that happened. Until around 2002, DHS did its own resource development and 196 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 closely monitored services. One social worker was charged with finding and developing community resources. She had this big board, and it was fun to go up there and just find tutoring services, all different services that were available in neighborhoods and in churches. When that social worker retired, the position was not filled. Other resource development staff investigated needs and developed new services. Monitoring staff were responsible for ensuring that an agency was meeting its mandates and providing the services expected by the agency. While monitoring staff still exists within the agency, a decision was made to disband the Resource Development Unit. Today, DHS, a $700 million agency charged with providing services to Philadelphia's most vulnerable children, does very little resource development of its own. In 2005, the City announced 197 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 layoffs. To avoid laying off critical staff, DHS gave up vacant program analyst positions. As program analysts left, their positions remained unfilled. Those positions were the positions responsible for monitoring agencies. DHS fell behind. Also facing the City is a violence and truancy plague. DHS was assigned the task of impacting youth violence, a task that would take somebody many, many hours to do a week, a full-time position, probably several full-time positions. Yet, this Commissioner, Cheryl Ransom-Garner, was expected to do both jobs, be the Commissioner of the Department of Human Services and also meet the mandates of the anti-violence youth program.
Our resources competed -- really had to be shared with the anti-violence and truancy initiatives. The deaths reported by the Inquirer are tragedies. DHS as part of a 198 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 larger system must accept some responsibility. However, the Inquirer also has a responsibility to report the whole story. How and why, not just what. And we have a responsibility to be open and transparent -- that seems to be the word of the day -- so that the public can understand that the system is not doing well and is in desperate need of public scrutiny and assistance. Some have argued that more children must be placed. Yet, Philadelphia has one of the highest placement rates in the nation. 4 children for every thousand impoverished children. That number does come out of a DPW report, but Arthur Evans testified earlier and really didn't have the benefit of or the opportunity to really explain that number, and so I'd like to do that in a 199 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 very short -- or just capsulize it. That number is a federal number, and they look at children placed in a 24-hour period, and frequently children are taken out of their homes. It's still a tragedy and it's still devastating to a child, but a child is taken out of their home for a very short period of time, perhaps because there is another place for a child to go, and the child is returned in 48 hours, maybe with court activity. Sometimes a parent doesn't always agree to accept service, so a child may be removed for a very short period of time and returned at the court date with services. 4 percent number. Actually, in reality, the placements in Philadelphia are lower. If we look at a snapshot in time, today we place fewer children than we did a year ago. And I believe the Department can provide you with that information, but I really wanted to make that clear and be 200 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 on the record, because those numbers get confusing and I really wouldn't want the public to think we run out and just snatch children, because it isn't what we do. It isn't what we want to do. And certainly Philadelphia really does offer more services than many of the counties around Philadelphia. So I wanted to clear that up. I also want to say that what's necessary sometimes to place a child -- there's been a lot of talk in the newspaper articles about placement, and there certainly is a school out there that believes that a child should be placed immediately. They even talk about orphanages. I think that I've interviewed and dealt with thousands of children in my career at DHS and I've yet to meet a child that felt good about being taken out of the home. Mostly children just want their families fixed. Perhaps children who have suffered injury and death have a lot to 201 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 tell us. In the wake of tragedy and desperation, there is opportunity. The Department needs staff, money and other resources so that a system that is already far ahead of other systems can catch up with those systems in other states whose reforms have resulted in fewer placements and lower re-abuse. You will hear some suggestions. I offer a few. One, maintain funds -- and this goes to the heart of the flex funds. Maintain funds that social workers and their supervisors can easily access for such items as beds, special programs, clothing, emergency rental payments, housing concerns and all of the expenses that support family stabilization. Housing is a very serious issue in the City of Philadelphia, and I think children sometimes get placed because their parents can't do better and we can't help them do better. I'd like to see the Resource Development restored 202 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 within the Department as a separate unit. I'd like to develop more quality monitoring systems.
Not paper systems, but a real partnership with the private provider that looks at services and then defines the needs and then plans those services. To expand safe programs that keep families together. I'd like to see family preservation and the old model of SCOH developed again and put in place at DHS and the Home Builders model of family preservation. Family preservation, even if it isn't the service -- if you're not going to actually do that as a treatment service because sometimes a family needs much more than that, it's a wonderful assessment model, because it tells you about the extended family. It tells you -- when you talk about kinship care, it tells you about grandpa up in New York that you would never know about. I mean, it tells you how the family does everything. So as an assessment model, 203 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 it's a wonderful model.
It's changed. I think, again, shrinking dollars, more cases coming in, pressures in the Department, fewer dollars for flex funds.
What's the total funding of money taken from the Department to go to other programs?
I don't know the answer to that question. I would have known that years ago. I don't know today. I know what we spent on our family preservation dollars, and I do not believe that it was expanded, and that 204 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 was five anyway -- I started in 1993 and in 2002 when I left, it was the same amount of money, and I know that between 1993 and 2002 costs went up. I believe it's the same amount of money now. They had to do the flex funds out of their money. It was built into the program funding. So as inflation took place, as problems became more severe, I think a lot of the service changed.
So you say there are families that -- and we certainly heard a lot of discussion today about the plight of the families, the poverty that exists. There needs to be some way to provide some resources to these families.
A little bit more than they may get if they're on assistance.
Absolutely. I mean, Welfare to Work has had a major 205 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 impact on families.
Well, families have to make a decision. Parents have to make a decision do they stay home with their children, do they raise their children, do they go to work and risk us taking their children because there isn't anybody to care for their children. The society itself today has created a lot of barriers to family preservation and to preserving family -- I mean, the values have changed in our society and the money has changed, and philosophy follows money. That's reality. Other things that I would like to see is, I'd like to see -- Richard Wexler mentioned Paul Vincent, who did some years ago come to Philadelphia. Alba Martinez brought him to Philadelphia. He did a study of the agency, and his conclusion was that the 206 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 Department of Human Services had to do significant training of supervisors. The supervisor line is very important. It's the professional line. Not that the rest of the agency isn't professional, but it is the line that guides the practice in the agency, and it needs significant -- they do need significant training. We have been working on that training, actually. Actually, we began to do that with Cheryl before she left, and we've been working with June and looking at what training is necessary, but Paul Vincent gave a plan, and that plan was put on the shelf. We have taken it off the shelf and are beginning to look at it, and I will approach the management about implementing it. It's a plan that will take three years. One of the problems is, anything that's really worthwhile doing that will create institutional change takes a very long time, and folks are reluctant to start something that takes a 207 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 very long time not knowing if the funding is going to be in place for it. So that's one of the reforms we really do have to implement. So I'm suggesting that. And I'm also asking that we closely examine all programs and initiatives and support services within the agency for efficacy and efficiency. Frequently in any bureaucracy, programs get started, folks get invested in it and they just stay, don't know what they're doing. So I think that this is an opportunity for this agency to really begin to look at itself and look at everything that it's doing, should we have specialized caseloads. When I came into the agency, we were divided up based on agencies. Like I had very specific -- any child that went through a specific agency, I had. So I knew the agency well. Today, cases are divided up across the board and like in the case like multi-ethnic, if they 208 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 had 100 cases, it could have been 80 workers they had and that don't necessarily talk to each other. So nobody really knows that there's a pattern going on. And that's something we might want to look at, how we design that now. Some folks feel that generic is better because it's good to have a handle on everything. I think it's time to look at that, and I'd like to see that happen in the agency. I think there's a lot of will to do that. Certainly Dr. Evans has begun to have those discussions. I'd like to bring together the key stakeholders. We used to have meetings with the private providers, supervisors, workers, private providers, have focus groups and look at the services and look at how we might work better together. I'd like to see that happen again. And, again, with transparency, I'd like to educate the public. I'd like 209 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 to have some town hall meetings and encourage public debate and community responsibility. We can't do this job alone. It really does take a village and it takes the entire community to begin to impact poverty and child abuse. Thank you.
Thank you so much for your testimony and for your information. I just have a couple of questions. I'd like to go back to Ms. Askew, and I'll come back. You talked about you have to close cases in a mandated time frame?
Yes. In working in -- well, in all the entities within the Department of Human Services, we are under certain time mandates. If you're assigned -- I'm only going to address working Intake, because that's where a lot of the pressure comes in 210 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 regarding time. You receive a CPS report. You have 30 days to make a determination on that case, because you have certain paperwork that you have to complete. It's a form called a CY-48 that needs to be completed with your determination whether abuse occurred, abuse or neglect occurred. You're given 30 days to do it. Sometimes you may be given extra time regarding the circumstances, if you're waiting for a coroner's report or if you're waiting for a doctor to get back with you, but for the most part, it has to be done -- a determination has to be done within 30 days. With the GPS, it's more of a General Protective Service report. You're given 60 days to make the determination. Within that time, you have to go out to do the investigation. You have to make sure the children are safe. You have to complete the paperwork. And in the Intake Department, 211 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 it's like triage in a hospital. You assess and -- well, this is in-house terms, assess and move, because you can't hold onto a case -- well, you should not in the Intake Department. You're primarily there to assess safety, document and move the case within a certain time frame, because that's your main job in Intake. If the case needs further services or if you place the child in foster care or kinship care, that's when you move it onto the Family Service region or you make referrals to maybe community-based or Family Preservation, where I am now. But you're not supposed to hold onto these cases. That's not your job as an Intake worker. I mean, it's very -- I'm not going to say difficult, but it's sometimes challenging, because you have to be a social worker, at the same time doing field work, and also -- you're a social worker, you do field work and you 212 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 also have to do paperwork. So there's a lot of things that you have to do when you're in the Intake Department. So you have to be very efficient, because you can't go over having so many cases on your caseload, because the cases keep coming in. Regardless if you were able to transfer or close these cases or not, you're still required to get your amount of cases for that month and to do the same thing on each and every case. And every case you need to go out and do the best job, as best practice as you can as far as social work and ensuring the safety of the children and still come back in the office and do the paperwork and everything else that you have to do.
How does this impact on the quality of care or quality of service?
It does impact on the quality of service, I believe, because how much social work can you really do when you have these 213 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 mandates on you to do the investigation, make a determination and make sure the case is moving in its right direction in the agency, whether you're going to close it out or whether you're going to transfer it? So you're really not being -- I try -- like I said, I only can speak for myself, and it's very, very stressful when you have to -- you want to do the best job possible. You want to save these children or you want to fix what's going on, and you're doing this, you're doing everything that you need to do, but in the mean time, the clock is still ticking for you to move this case. So you try to do as much as you can in the short amount of time that you have, and then hopefully that your case is going to transfer to another unit with someone that's going to do the exact same thing that you did and not see the case another way and go another way with it. It can impact on the quality of 214 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 care, because you don't have the time that you would like to have to do everything within that family that's needed, because if you do, then you're going over your time mandates and then the case is out of compliance, and then you have to deal with whatever comes after that.
Let me ask you another question. You talked about the court and your testimony being thrown out the window. Would you elaborate a little more on that?
Elaborating on court. Often times, once again, you go out and do an investigation. You're there. You see it. You hear it. You know what's going on. You go to court. You try to explain your position to all the parties that are involved, the child advocate, you have your attorney, you have the City Solicitor that's speaking for you. The 215 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 child advocate is there for the child, advocating for the child. You're there also advocating for the child, but also for that family. You may have determined that the child may need certain things or the mother is capable of doing certain things, but the child advocate is there just for that child. And we're still talking about children, but they're going on what the child wants. Children don't know what's in their best interest sometimes, but that's their position, because they're the child's advocate. So you're trying to present yourself to the judge, having them understand where you're coming from, because you're actually the one that's out there and often times the child advocate social worker only sees that child a day of court or the day before court, when you've actually been out there, have been working with this family for maybe 30 days. And then you go to 216 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 court. You're presenting yourself, and then you don't have an agreement. The child advocate sees it one way; DHS sees it another way. And when, like what's going on now, when we're under scrutiny, what we're saying, it's not even being heard, because we have a lot of people that's trying to save face. So because of DHS had the eyes and ears, everyone is looking at us, then what we're saying really doesn't matter. And often times that has been the case. And when you have judges just looking at what's presented before them and going on what they think should happen, without actually knowing what has happened and have made snap judgements, snap decisions, sometimes you have removed children from dangerous situations from homes, only to have the judge return the children back home to have something happen to them all over again, and then another report is made, then you're back in court again. 217 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867
Thank you very much. At least we'll get some idea of the kinds of -- we haven't had you here in a long time in terms of issues around DHS, and we certainly hope that -- it seems that Dr. Evans is trying to sit with you to work with you on some of the issues that you've raised. Hopefully that some of the changes -- it's a very big department, very complicated, but that your input should be there as you wrestle with some of the issues that you deal with.
I want to say that there's no question that probably Dr. Evans is very tired of speaking with us. He speaks with us frequently. He's been a great partner. In this time -- Cheryl was a good partner, too. Cheryl was really there also. We had total access to Cheryl, when the Mayor didn't pull her away from the agency. But Dr. Evans has taken over this agency. I mean, for a guy who really had no child 218 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 welfare background, and I was a little skeptical at the beginning, he knows systems and he really does involve everybody and he listens, and hopefully we will move ahead now.
Thank you very much for your testimony. We appreciate it. We'll have you back in the spring during the budget session so you can bring us up to date on what's going on. Next we have our final panel, and I hope they're still here. We thank you for waiting. Margaret Zukoski, Christina Kirchner and Katherine Gomez. Every time you come to City Council, bring your lunch, always. Thank you so much for waiting. You've heard the testimonies. We appreciate your coming. Whose article did I read yesterday in the paper about DHS?
Was it Cathy Carr? Yeah, my Executive Director. 219 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867
Good afternoon, Madam Chairwoman. I am Margaret Zukoski and I am the Associate Director of the Pennsylvania Council of Children, Youth and Family Services. The Pennsylvania Council is a statewide membership association comprised of 130 private child welfare, juvenile justice and behavioral healthcare agencies that collectively employ over 20,000 individuals. On behalf of our members, I thank you for this opportunity. The Pennsylvania Council supports its members by advocating for responsive and accessible services through our work with the state and local public child welfare agencies, the State Legislature and other key stakeholders in the child welfare system; by providing 220 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 professional development and staff training opportunities; and analyzing and sharing information that impacts child welfare service delivery. Pennsylvania Council members work with children who are at risk or who have been abused or neglected, as well as with their families. They do this through a wide variety of services, including prevention services, SCOH services, foster care, residential, behavioral health and drug and alcohol programs. Many of our member agencies also provide educational services, early intervention programs and other community-based programs for families. Approximately 60 percent of our member agencies contract with the Philadelphia Department of Human Services, and 84 percent of DHS's funding is designated for payments to private agencies for the delivery of purchased direct prevention and social work services. 221 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 The provider community in Philadelphia, as has been mentioned several times today, has been serving abused, neglected and dependent children for well over 100 years, long before the public sector services were mandated. The private sector remains a fundamental part of our current service system, not only by delivering contracted services to thousands of Philadelphia's most vulnerable children and families, but also by contributing millions of private dollars to support shortfalls in appropriated funding for publicly mandated services. Today, we are here because of the tragic deaths of children involved in the child welfare system. As you are aware, two children died during the time a private agency was under contract with DHS to deliver services to the children and families. Upon hearing this, the provider community was shocked and saddened. These deaths, however, have 222 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 started what can be defined as a moment where the child welfare system has the opportunity to identify and correct gaps in service that undermine the safety and well-being of Philadelphia's children. While current news articles portray a provider system that has universally failed to protect children, this is not an accurate depiction of the work done by the majority of fine private providers who are dedicated professionals committed to delivering quality, effective and responsive services to fragile families. Families receiving SCOH services face a myriad of problems. Frequently, as you have heard, they are living in poverty, struggling with substance abuse, domestic violence, mental illness and woefully inadequate housing. Because of SCOH services, children who are at risk of being placed in foster care have been able to remain in their homes with their safety and well-being being monitored by providers, 223 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 while the provider is simultaneously working with their family to strengthen their ability to care for their children. The lives of thousands of families and children have been positively affected as the result of SCOH services. Tragically, the stark reality of child welfare interventions is that there are times when you can do everything right, implement every support available and still have a tragic result.
Notwithstanding this harsh reality, the child welfare community and the collaborative systems are working together to remediate the factors that lead to abuse and neglect and to improve policies, practices and interventions so the likelihood of child maltreatment is reduced and eliminated. The Pennsylvania Council and its members are working wholeheartedly with both the Philadelphia Department of Human Services and their own agency staff to ensure the safety, well-being and 224 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 permanency of children under their care and supervision. In addition to the efforts of individual agencies to ensure safety through their ongoing regular home visits and provision of services, at the request of DHS, providers recently completed a comprehensive report on each of the 8,000 children in Philadelphia receiving SCOH services. This report was completed to document that each child's health, education and other special needs and the status of services to address those needs were identified and met. Provider agency social workers work long, late hours and weekends to complete this huge undertaking in two weeks' time. Providers will support and assist the efforts of the Mayor's Child Review Panel, the safety and well-being assessments being conducted by DHS, the quality service reviews that will be coming underway by DPW's Office of Children, Youth and Families and the in-depth service reviews which will be 225 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 conducted by nationally recognized child welfare experts. The Pennsylvania Council has also convened special meetings of its SCOH Provider Work Group to discuss how providers can both support DHS efforts and tighten our own safety net for children. This work group, which has been meeting on a monthly basis for more than years, is comprised of senior 12 program directors and supervisors from 13 SCOH programs. Members meet regularly 14 with DHS staff to discuss SCOH policy and 15 practice concerns. It has been a wonderful forum for advancing practice. Providers in recent years have worked closely with DHS in implementing the Family Assessment Form, a nationally recognized assessment tool which not only tracks a family's progress over time, but also helps the provider worker identify and respond to risks in the family. Also, over the past several years, DHS and providers have achieved 226 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 great successes in helping children and families in other key areas, and Dr. Evans referenced these. The implementation of wide-scale community-based prevention services, which DHS contracts with private providers to deliver, have contributed to decreases in the number of children needing formal child welfare services. Additionally, through the implementation of performance-based contracting in foster care, which began in March 2003, the number of children in foster care has dropped nearly 15 percent. The PBC foster care model has driven an 84 percent increase in the permanency rate for children and a 50 percent increase in stability in placements as compared to 2002. Simultaneously, the number of children reentering care after having been reunified with their family has decreased dramatically. DHS and the provider community will continue to work together to bring the same intensity of 227 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 focus and collaborative spirit to efforts to ensure that SCOH services reflect best practice and positive outcomes. The Pennsylvania Council has appeared before City Council on several occasions. Typically, we come before you to offer comment on DHS's budget requests. In March of this year, we offered testimony on DHS's funding year '07 budget. We testified that providers have experienced funding shortfalls in all aspects of doing business, from administration to service delivery. Double-digit inflationary increases have been incurred in operating health insurances, transportation and utilities.
These and other direct costs of doing business have increased for providers without commensurate increases in rates paid by DHS for purchased services. In reviewing the system shortfalls, we would be remiss if we did not identify here today to you our serious concerns related to the purchase 228 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 of service and payment mechanisms for providers. The ability to recruit and retain staff and support responsive and flexible services is directly linked to adequate compensation. Just as competitive wage scales are critical to retention, so are opportunities for training and support for continued professional development and skill refinement. Opportunities and funding for private provider staff to access relevant training remains a serious challenge. Pennsylvania Council leadership has met with Dr. Evans to address concerns. We deeply appreciate his openness to hearing the issues and effort to begin to identify constructive solutions. Given the serious and complexity of the current environment and the urgency for corrective actions, the private provider community stands ready to offer resources in terms of experience and expertise held by the leadership 229 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 within the private agencies. I extend this resource, as well as the staff of the Pennsylvania Council to be part of the solution-focused efforts to address the challenges we share in the child welfare system in Philadelphia. Again, I thank you for this opportunity on behalf of the members of the Pennsylvania Council.
Thank you very much. And in case you may have to go, I just have two questions for you, I believe. Are all of the providers, all agencies who provide SCOH services, a part of your Council?
Is there a membership cost? 230 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867
Do you know the percentage number of agencies in Philadelphia who might be members of your organization that do exist and provide -- do you know the agencies which provide SCOH services and those agencies which are members of your organization?
Yes, I do. Thirty-two SCOH programs in Philadelphia are members of the Pennsylvania Council. I believe at this time there are approximately 42 agencies providing SCOH services. So the vast majority of agencies providing SCOH services are members of the Council and are active members in the SCOH Providers Work Group.
And you do provide training and information and stuff like that?
Yes, we do. We provide a staff training program, which is one of the benefits of our membership. 231 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 Our members can access low-cost high-quality training at a reduced fee. Unfortunately, Councilwoman, our agencies are not able to access the same level of training that DHS workers are. DHS workers have approximately -- they take the core training course that the State mandates. That's 120 hours of training over months. In Philadelphia, even 11 before a DHS worker is really out in the 12 field, they have 12 weeks of extensive 13 training. 14 The way the SCOH providers are 15 paid for service, which is on a per diem 16 basis per case, doesn't allow them the 17 flexibility or the resources to provide 18 that level of in-depth training prior to workers being in the field, although they do a terrific job through means such as their own in-house training, sharing training with other provider agencies and using the Pennsylvania Council.
Thank you very much. 232 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867
I guess let me ask you another question. How many of your members have had complaints filed against them? Is it a large percentage or a small percentage?
I know at this point of the one agency that was named in the paper was a member of the Pennsylvania Council.
Good afternoon, Madam Chairwoman, and thank you for allowing me to offer my comments today. They're a slightly different note than our recent speaker. But I am Chris Kirchner and I am the Director of the Philadelphia Children's Alliance, and we were founded in 1989 to improve the way that child sexual abuse cases are handled in the City of Philadelphia. Original founders of our agency included leaders 233 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 from DHS, the Police Department Special Victims Unit and the Office of the District Attorney, and we're located out of 40th and Chestnut Street and we've been serving there since we opened our doors in 1990. In Philadelphia, the Department of Human Services documents an average of 160 reports of alleged child sexual abuse per month, and Pennsylvania state law requires that the majority of these reports also be investigated by the Police. When allegations of sexual abuse are reported to either DHS or the Police, a myriad of services must be activated, and the degree to which the service providers collaborate is often key to a successful outcome for the child and family, as well as the lowest cost to society. It is not always easy to ensure collaboration in a city the size of Philadelphia, thus our mission is to create a coordinated multi-disciplinary 234 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 professional response that brings healing and justice to abused children. We benefit children by providing a safe, comfortable, child-friendly facility, with an effective interview process and support services. We provide the following services: We oversee joint Police/DHS interviews where investigators from both agencies attend and partner with one of our child interview specialists who conducts an interview using protocols developed to meet the needs of both DHS and the Police, hoping to reduce the number of times that kids have to be interviewed about very sensitive information. All of our interviews are recorded, and copies of the recording are made available to the investigative agencies. Written reports of all child interviews are also provided. Crisis counseling for non-offending parents, referrals for 235 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 emergency medical, legal, financial and therapeutic services are offered. Case tracking through a database and case review meetings with all team members ensure that information is shared throughout the life of the case. We also offer training for professionals in team building, forensic interviewing and related subjects, and we currently have a grant from the Justice Department to provide training and technical assistance to communities in the northeastern United States that are hoping to develop a collaborative response in child abuse cases. There are many benefits to a comprehensive approach to child abuse interventions, some of which were recently documented in a study out of the Center for Policy Research in Denver, Colorado, which found that joint child welfare/law enforcement investigations had some of the following benefits: More 236 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 contacts during the investigation, more frequent in-person interviews with everyone involved in the case, more perpetrators removed from the home, more perpetrator confessions, more frequent victim corroboration, more substantiated reports and dependency filings, more criminal prosecutions and more guilty pleas. In other major cities across the country, including Chicago, Houston and Brooklyn, programs like the Children's Alliance have played a pivotal role in enabling different agencies to overcome barriers to collaboration in both child sexual and child physical abuse cases. However, one of the most effective strategies used in other locales, especially large urban environments, to forge and institutionalize collaboration is the physical co-location of the public and private agencies that are involved in the response. 237 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES.
060867 Co-located programs in other cities have demonstrated dramatic improvements in the provision of services to children and families, including more services, shorter response times, more comprehensive investigations, higher client and professional satisfaction, and increased community awareness and responsiveness. In Chicago, 145 professionals -- that includes law enforcement officers, social workers from their DHS equivalent, prosecutors, medical and mental health providers -- are co-located in a 22,000-square-foot facility built solely for that purpose by the city, serving 3,000 children per year. In Houston, 200 professionals are co-located in a 52,000-square-foot facility that serves 3,400 children per year. In Brooklyn, the development of the co-located Children's Alliance program was prompted by the death of Eliza Esquierdo in 1995 -- former 238 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 Commissioner Timoney led that development of that co-located program -- when it was determined that failure of police and child welfare to collaborate, partly because they were prohibited from doing so by state confidentiality laws, contributed to the child's remaining in a dangerous situation. To date, Philadelphia has accomplished an unprecedented level of cooperation and coordination among representatives from child welfare, law enforcement, medical and mental health communities, although at the Children's Alliance we only see one in four cases of child sexual abuse with a coordinated response. Building on the positive experience that we've had thus far, since 1990, we now stand ready to lead a greater level of collaboration to assure that critical services are available to abused children and their non-offending family members by developing a co-located program on the campus of Episcopal 239 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 Hospital at Front and Lehigh Streets. When the Special Victims Unit of the Philadelphia Police Department moved into its current space about five years ago on the campus of Episcopal Hospital, it was with the intention of creating a co-located program with DHS, Police, PCA, the Children's Alliance, and a medical clinic staffed by our children's hospitals on site for the purpose of further coordinating investigations among all agencies. We've been working on that initiative for the past five years. We had all gone looking for new space for SVU when they were house-hunting hoping to find a facility that could accommodate all of us, and in the Episcopal site, we found that facility. But we've been delayed by various barriers, but as we understand it now, the City is negotiating with Episcopal to lease the entire building, permitting the Children's Alliance to occupy the lower level and the 8th floor, 240 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 the Department of Human Services the 5th, 6th and 7th floors, with Police remaining on their existing floors one through four and the medical component housed in the lower level with the Children's Alliance. Space for the Children's Alliance will include adequate interview, observation, counseling and team meeting and training rooms. We project to have five interview rooms with five observation rooms so that DHS and the Police can partner with our child interview specialists in conducting high-quality child interviews so that we can serve all of the City's children for whom allegations of sexual abuse have been made in a state-of-the-art facility using a collaborative approach. While we are optimistic based on what we've heard recently that co-location will move forward, we want this project to become a reality in 2007. The Police Department, the Department of Human Services and the District 241 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES.
060867 Attorney's office have all voiced their support for a co-located program, and it is against this backdrop that we look forward to partnering with public and private stakeholders to assure that child sexual assault investigations are conducted in the most effective and efficient way possible with the best outcome for the child, the family and the community. I am happy to answer any questions, and I hope that you and members of this Committee will help us to make a co-located child abuse response a reality in Philadelphia. Thank you.
Yes. Thank you very much. Good afternoon, Chairwoman and members of --
It's not that I don't have any questions for you. 242 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 I mean, you spelled it out pretty well, so it's just sort of like a little follow-up review with you. Okay?
Good afternoon, Chairwoman and members of the Committee. We greatly appreciate the opportunity to testify before you today. My name is Katherine Gomez. I'm the Managing Attorney of the Family Advocacy Unit at Community Legal Services. For the past years, the Family Advocacy Unit has 15 been representing parents, both providing 16 advice and also doing individual legal 17 representation at 1801, Dependency Court, 18 for thousands of parents over the years. 19 I'm here to speak on behalf of 20 our clients. The vast majority of our 21 clients are low-income African-American 22 or Latino single parents, who are 23 committed to being good parents to their 24 children. With services like Family 25 Preservation and SCOH, most of these 243 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 parents are ultimately able to meet the needs of their children. So I'm here to represent that population and to make clear that despite the accounts in the newspapers, really the overwhelming majority of parents that are in the dependency system are parents who are not brutal, are not horrible, are not evil, honestly want to do a good job parenting and are seeking assistance and are open to assistance and, with assistance, can properly parent their children. I will not read my testimony verbatim. I know you have it. I just want to highlight three points that is not really the subject of much public discussion, so I just want to hit on them. One is, we cannot separate risk and safety assessment from the quality of family preservation. When we have meaningful services in the home, it affects the safety of that family and how we assess safety for that family. The 244 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 key is not so much -- we talk about words like services, services, services, but what does it actually mean? We talk about SCOH. The key here is not just that SCOH is coming out to the home and ensuring that the child is safe, but that SCOH is actually doing something for that family to help that family sustain safety once SCOH is long gone. So what they're actually doing in that home is key. And so we emphasize that whatever evaluation happens with regard to SCOH, and we applaud those evaluations, but it really focuses on what skills do the SCOH workers possess, what are they passing on, what are they teaching these families who are desperately in need of assistance. It's our experience involving thousands of families that SCOH services when properly implemented can be an invaluable tool. We've seen numerous instances where SCOH has made a critical difference that has kept families 245 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 together. I just want to give a brief example. In a particular case, we represented a mother who had four children. One of the children was injured by the father while visiting with the father over the weekend. Mother did everything appropriate. She contacted the Police. DHS got involved. When DHS got involved, they noticed that there were problems with mother's home. Mother was poor. She had utility problems. She barely had furniture. Her rented apartment needed serious repairs. Another child in the home appeared to have developmental delays. DHS asked the mother if she would accept SCOH services. She accepted. And, thankfully, the SCOH worker who was assigned to her was very savvy, met with her weekly for several hours, taught the mother how to budget money, taught the mother how to assemble documents to get a better and more 246 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 affordable apartment, taught the mother how to negotiate a lease and helped the mother negotiate the lease. She located community groups that provided after-school programs and made sure that the children were enrolled in after-school programs and camps. She helped the mother locate different resources for her developmentally disabled child, made sure that the assessments happened, made sure that mom followed up with those appointments.
By the time the SCOH worker had closed the case, this family had made such tremendous progress. They reached a point where not only did they have better and more appropriate housing, they were connected to other community resources. She taught the mother how to find ways to make the children's lives better, how to be -- she helped empower this mother to make change and to continue with that change. And that's exactly what we mean by quality SCOH services. 247 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 This particular SCOH worker had several years of experience. She had a sophisticated understanding that every family is different. She saw what this family particularly needed and was nuanced in her approach to this family. She also had a good handle on how to navigate City systems. There are some bureaucracy that needs to be navigated when you're trying to get services, and the SCOH worker was able to do that. She had the interpersonal skills. Even though this SCOH worker was not of the same race as this client, she had the interpersonal skills to gain the young mother's trust, to empower her, to put her at ease so that the mother was open to receiving this help. Philadelphia's families need a more consistently effective, accountable and confidence-inspiring SCOH service to emerge as a result of whatever reform efforts we do. 248 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 The other issue that I want to touch upon is placement panic. Now, I have had the benefit of coming last in speaking today and so I have heard different people describe whether or not placement panic is happening. It's my -- before I get into statistics, which I got from DHS, I want to say anecdotally, we're in court every day, and in the last three months, we have seen a significant rise in the number of detentions coming into court and the number of times DHS is requesting for children to be removed from their homes, and that concerns us. So regardless of how you want to read the statistics, anecdotally we feel that it's happening, and we see it. Now, the data we've received indicate that there's been a 100 percent increase in the number of restraining orders filed and that there's been an overall of 23 percent increase in the total number of first-time placements of children. Now, these numbers maybe over 249 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 the course might seem like a blip, but I think it's very troubling given that it was a spike in a short period of time after certain news coverage, and I think that's basically the definition of placement panic. And placement panic is dangerous because when we talk about removal and we talk about placement, those are bureaucratic terms for what we mean by going into somebody's house, taking their child away abruptly, removing that child from their mother, their siblings, their home, their neighborhood, their school, their church and, more often than not, putting that child with a succession of strangers. That is powerful. That is a radical act, and we should be very careful when we take that step. And it's very easy when you're in this work every day to forget what a radical act that is. It's also easy to forget that the court system, as a general matter, once you pass the preliminary stages, 250 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 you're in court every five months. So mistakes like that are hard to correct and may take months to correct, and that impact will be felt by that child. And I'm not going to go into foster care outcomes, because I think my colleague on the national level, Richard Wexler, covered that. I just want to be sure that any efforts we take, we should make clear that we don't tolerate an environment where placement panic is okay, even if it's short lived. We won't tolerate it. It's not okay. We are responsible, the child welfare system, all of us. It's not just DHS when we talk about placement panic.
All of us are implicated, that we won't tolerate that and that the child welfare system is responsible not just for the child's physical well-being, but also for their emotional well-being. Finally, I want to end on the note that there's been a lot of talk about SCOH, but SCOH isn't the only 251 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 service that DHS provides. DHS provides many wonderful services, some better than others. And I think that that's part of our task, is to do an honest evaluation of programs, support and give business to the programs that work, expand them, duplicate them. That's part of our charge. DHS in the last several years -- and Dr. Kuna has been a big part of that. We have to be very grateful for DHS's openness. In the past several years, DHS has said, We want to solve problems, tell us what problems exist and we want to work with you on coming up with solutions and creating programs that work. So we have been happy with a lot of the initiative DHS has taken, and we hope that in the current climate, programs and family preservation and taking initiative and taking chances, that all of these things aren't shut down because we're scared. 252 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 Finally, I just want to end with the obvious, which is, in Philadelphia when we talk about removing children, when we talk about preserving families, what we're talking about is how we deal with poor people, their families and the troubles with their families. We can't divorce poverty from this whole issue. You know, for most of these parents, when they need any type of assistance, whether it be assistance that DHS provides or whether it be some other systems, substance abuse or mental health treatment, because of their poverty, they have nowhere else to turn but City agencies. So the quality and the accessibility of those services is so key to helping these families, both before they get involved with DHS and while they get involved with DHS. So we've been a big proponent of front-loading services and making high-quality services available. But 253 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 that remains a tremendous task, a task that is largely out of DHS's hands, but not out of the City's hands. Thank you, again, for this opportunity, and we just want to end with the final plug of quality services are extremely important, because even when we're not looking at the subset of parents, the sort of larger scheme shows that there are close to 100,000 parents that benefit from DHS services. So the quality of those services is key. It's key to keeping children safe, not just in the most vulnerable homes, but there's a wide spectrum of homes. So we should sort of keep going back to that focus, that it's not just that somebody shows up at the home, but actually what services are they providing to make sure this family gets better. Thank you.
Thank you very much. And certainly working with the Council here on the training of the 254 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 workers to have a better range of training and understanding of what's needed in a family is very important. I really thank you for your testimony. Did you present written testimony?
I didn't see that here, but we thank you. We'll make the entire testimony part of the record. We thank you for your testimony. And before I call Dr. Evans back, because I have one question for he and the Deputy, is there anyone else here to testify on this resolution? (No response.)
Thank you. We'll probably see you in the March budget hearings. I think you all should come back and give us an update on what's going on. Dr. Evans and to your Deputy, and I have to apologize to him because I keep forgetting his name. 255 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867
You heard about this placement panic, and Ms. Gomez mentioned the increase in the number of children coming out of the home now. What's your take on that?
Well, the Department has looked at the issue of placement and the number of kids placed out of home, for several years has been actively trying to bring those numbers down. We look at some data -- and I have some charts that I can show you that show that, I think it was, in 2003 the number of children placed outside of the home was in the 7,500 range. Today it's in the 6,100 range. So it's been a steady decrease over the last several years. We take a point in time snapshot at the end of each year and at the end of each month. At the end of '06, the fiscal year '06, which would have been June 30th of this year -- I 256 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 don't want to quote numbers, but the numbers have gone up slightly from that time point, but even today, the number of children placed outside of the home is less than it was in January of this year. So it is true that we have had an increase. It is not, from what we can see, what other major cities have experienced when they've had this kind of media coverage, which I think is a testament to the Department and to the workers and to the leadership of the Department. My executive team, which has gotten ahead of this issue a little bit, what we want to see -- and it looks like right now the trend has at least attenuated. I won't say that we're starting to go back down in terms of the overall number of placements, but it doesn't seem like that there's this major panic increase that you see in other systems.
So the workers have not gone back to their files 257 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 and said, Oh, I've got to get this child out of the home because we're under scrutiny from the paper?
You know, I don't know what the individual practice has been, and, again, there has been some increase, but I think what's really important is for the staff to feel like they are supported. And the way we've approached the media and all of the coverage of the Department has not been to overreact, and I think people sense that. I hope they feel supported by that. And it's not that we're not going to look at these cases and figure out what happened and if there were mistakes, but the way we're approaching it is very measured. I think it's very balanced, and we have put the emphasis on trying to make sure that kids in the system are safe, and I think that goes a long way of creating an environment where people can make the best judgments that they can in these cases. 258 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867
Well, I certainly thank both of you and all of you who have come to testify today. I think the point that has been made throughout the day by most of the people who have presented testimony is that we have problems, big problems, which we all talk about here in the City of Philadelphia. That is one of poverty, lack of employment, and we need to look at how we address the prevention. So people who are working and they are in good housing and they can pay their bills are less prone to be violent, which we have the other issue of violence on the other side because of all the social problems. You come in as sort of "I got to save these kids." They don't start with you. You receive them. And so your role and your challenge is great. We wanted to just have this discussion, because we would have had it on October the 25th, didn't have an opportunity to have it. We will continue 259 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 the discussion. I don't know whether it will be prior to the budget, but certainly we invite those who testified to come back and give us your take during the budget process when the Department of Human Services will present their testimony, because a lot of the reform measures that they want and some of the services that were outlined by the Council which are needed in terms of training and increase of contract, payment of services to these providers, they all have budget issues. And so we have to look at your budget when you bring it in here to see if you're adequately funded to provide the services that are needed, particularly the training and the resources that some of the individuals talked about. So it's extremely important that we get feedback at the budget time, and you certainly hopefully will be able to wade through all of that.
Well, we appreciate 260 12/13/06 - PUBLIC HEALTH - RES. 060867 that. We appreciate the opportunity to be here and particularly the spirit in which the meeting has been carried out. Any information that you need, please feel free to let us know.
Thank you. We will recess this Committee hearing until the call of the Chair. Thank you. (Committee on Public Health and Human Services adjourned at 3:20 p.m.) - - - 261 CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the proceedings, evidence and objections are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me upon the foregoing matter on December 13, 2006, and that this is a true and correct transcript of same. ______________________________ MICHELE L. MURPHY RPR-Notary Public (The foregoing certification of this transcript does not apply to any reproduction of the same by any means, unless under the direct control and/or supervision of the certifying reporter.)