Download:
pdf |
pdfChild and Family
Services Reviews
Statewide Assessment
Insert Date of Submission
PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT OF 1995 (Pub. L. 104−13) STATEMENT OF PUBLIC BURDEN: The purpose of this information collection
is to review state child welfare systems’ performance related to child protective services, foster care, adoption, family preservation and
independent living as well as their conformity to required child and family outcomes. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is
estimated to average 120 hours per grantee, including the time for reviewing instructions, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and
reviewing the collection of information. This is a mandatory collection of information (45 CFR 1355.33(b)). An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB # is 0970−0214 and the expiration date is XX/XX/XXXX. If you have
any comments on this collection of information, please contact the Children's Bureau at Danielle.McConaga@acf.hhs.gov
This page was intentionally left blank.
Table of Contents
Background ............................................................................................................................ 1
Purpose of the Statewide Assessment ................................................................................. 1
Stakeholder Involvement ...................................................................................................... 2
Capacity to Complete a Quality Statewide Assessment ....................................................... 3
Availability and Use of Quality Data and Information ............................................................ 4
The Statewide Assessment Template .................................................................................. 5
Preparation .......................................................................................................................... 6
Instructions........................................................................................................................... 7
Section I: General Information ............................................................................................... 8
Name of State Child Welfare Agency: .................................................................................. 8
State Child Welfare Contact Person(s) for the Statewide Assessment .................................... 8
List of Statewide Assessment Participants ........................................................................... 9
Description of Stakeholder Involvement in Statewide Assessment Process ........................11
Section II: State Context Affecting Overall Performance....................................................12
Section III: Assessment of Child and Family Outcomes .....................................................13
A. Safety .............................................................................................................................13
B. Permanency....................................................................................................................15
C. Well-Being ......................................................................................................................17
Section IV: Assessment of Systemic Factors .....................................................................19
A. Statewide Information System .........................................................................................20
B. Case Review System ......................................................................................................21
C. Quality Assurance System ..............................................................................................26
D. Staff and Provider Training .............................................................................................27
E. Service Array and Resource Development......................................................................30
F. Agency Responsiveness to the Community .....................................................................32
G. Foster and Adoptive Parent Licensing, Recruitment, and Retention ................................34
Appendix: CFSR State Data Profile......................................................................................38
This page was intentionally left blank.
OMB Control Number: 0970-0214
Expiration Date: XX/XX/XXXX
Background
One of the ways in which the Children’s Bureau (CB) helps states achieve positive outcomes for
children and families is monitoring state child welfare services through Child and Family Services
Reviews (CFSRs). The CFSR process 1 is designed to meet the statutory requirement to provide
federal oversight of states’ compliance with title IV-B and IV-E plan requirements and to
strengthen state child welfare programs and improve safety, permanency, and well-being
outcomes for children and families served. The CFSR process enables CB to:
1) Ensure conformity with federal child welfare requirements
2) Determine what is happening to children and families receiving child welfare services
3) Assist states in enhancing their capacity to help children and families achieve positive
outcomes related to safety, permanency, and well-being
For more information about the CFSRs, see the Child and Family Services Reviews at
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb.
Purpose of the Statewide Assessment
The CFSR is a two-phase process. The first phase is a statewide assessment and is conducted
by staff of the state child welfare agency in partnership with representatives with whom the
agency was required to consult in the development of the state’s Child and Family Services Plan
(CFSP) (45 CFR § 1355.33). These internal and external stakeholders are selected by the agency
in collaboration with CB and may include other individuals, such as family and youth served by the
state’s child welfare system and members of the judicial and legal communities.
The second phase of the review process is an onsite review. The onsite review includes case
record reviews, case-related interviews for the purpose of determining outcome performance,
and, as necessary, stakeholder interviews to further inform the assessment of systemic factors.
Information from both the statewide assessment and the onsite review is used to determine
whether the state is in substantial conformity with the seven outcomes and seven systemic
factors. States determined not to be in substantial conformity with one or more of the seven
outcomes and seven systemic factors are required to develop a Program Improvement Plan (PIP)
to address all areas of nonconformity.
States are required to complete and document an assessment of the extent to which their
federally funded child welfare system functions effectively to promote the safety, permanency, and
well-being of children and families with whom they have contact. This process involves a state:
1
•
Using both quantitative and qualitative evidence (e.g., state administrative data,
information management system reports, case record reviews, interviews with case
participants and key stakeholders) to assess its performance on the outcomes and
systemic factors
•
Analyzing and explaining its Risk-Standardized Performance (RSP) relative to the
national performance for the CFSR statewide data indicators
•
Providing supporting evidence of the state’s assessment of its child welfare system,
program, practice strengths, opportunities for improvement, and results of data-driven
problem exploration
Procedures for the review. 45 CFR § 1355.33.
CFSR Statewide Assessment
1
Overview and Instructions
•
Providing relevant and quality evidence for CB to determine substantial conformity with
CFSR systemic factors
•
Communicating about the child welfare system’s performance with the communities the
systems served
•
Demonstrating the engagement of child welfare system partners and stakeholders in the
state’s CFSR assessment and in its continuous quality improvement (CQI) change and
implementation process
•
Identifying priority areas of focus for further examination and to target improvement
plans to strengthen systems and improve child and family outcomes
•
Describing progress to address practice, program, and systemic change, and needed
adjustments, as applicable
•
Using assessment results to inform planning for the onsite review and to provide a
foundation for the state PIP
Stakeholder Involvement
The statewide assessment is to be completed in collaboration with, and reflective of perspectives
and feedback obtained from, state child welfare system partners and stakeholders pursuant to 45
CFR § 1355.33 (a–b). CB recommends that states assemble a diverse and representative
statewide assessment team (as described below) while also consistently soliciting feedback and
perspectives from key stakeholder groups, including parents, caregivers, and youth, throughout
the CFSR process.
Individuals on the statewide assessment team need to include representatives from those with
whom the child welfare agency was required to consult in developing its title IV-B state plan. The
statewide assessment team members are selected by the child welfare agency in collaboration
with CB. CB recommends that states ensure family and youth representation on the statewide
assessment team, as well as other key partners (e.g., members of the legal and judicial
communities, including state courts, the Court Improvement Project, and stakeholders). Examples
of other partners and stakeholders who might serve on the statewide assessment team include
frontline workers; foster, adoptive, and relative caregivers; the Community-Based Child Abuse
Prevention (CBCAP) lead agency and other prevention partners, such as Children’s Trust Funds;
the Children’s Justice Act grantee; service providers; faith-based and community organizations;
and representatives of state and local agencies administering other federal or federally assisted
programs serving children and families, such as Head Start, child care, and Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families (TANF).
The statewide assessment team of internal and external stakeholders engage in the CFSR
statewide assessment process by:
•
Empowering families and youth to participate in ongoing conversations about systemlevel improvement needs by recognizing and honoring their lived experiences and
expertise, soliciting from them their perceptions and experiences, and acting on their
recommendations about what families need to be strong and healthy 2
2 As outlined in the CB Information Memorandum to states (ACYF-CB-IM-19-03), parent, family, and
youth voice is critical to understanding how well the child welfare system is achieving its goals. States are
encouraged to integrate parents and youth throughout the CFSR process as they have lived expertise
that provides critical context and information to identify and make child welfare system improvements.
CFSR Statewide Assessment
2
Overview and Instructions
•
Collecting and analyzing data from selected partner and stakeholder groups through
surveys, interviews, and/or focus groups
•
Using partners’ administrative data (may require data-sharing agreements with
contracted service providers and other agencies providing services to the same
populations) in the assessment process and to provide evidence of performance and
systemic functioning
•
Involving stakeholders in the review and analysis of data to help identify contributing
factors, underlying causes of performance challenges, and possible solutions
•
Discussing findings, recommended changes, and implications of proposed interventions,
and obtaining stakeholder feedback regarding implemented solutions
•
Systematically providing feedback to stakeholders regarding whether and how their input
was used to change policy, processes, practice, or service provision
Capacity to Complete a Quality Statewide Assessment
States are encouraged to consider the following questions as they prepare to complete the
statewide assessment:
•
Does the statewide assessment team reflect the family and youth the system serves, as
well as partners, stakeholders, and providers involved in the state child welfare system?
•
Are team members committed to remaining involved, and is there a process to support
them throughout the statewide assessment process, potential involvement in the onsite
review, and development, implementation, and evaluation of the PIP?
•
Do the state’s infrastructure and information systems provide needed administrative and
case record review data? What data are already collected and can be used, and what
new data may be needed (e.g., resource family surveys, staff training participation and
feedback)?
•
To what extent do system partners collect data and make it available for the purposes of
the statewide assessment? Are data-sharing agreements needed, and in place?
•
Do some team members have expertise and experience in quantitative and qualitative
measurement, data collection, data analytics, and technical writing? Are team members
able to communicate the results of quantitative and qualitative analyses effectively to the
range of stakeholders and partners who are part of the statewide assessment team?
•
Do team members have knowledge and skills with the CQI change and implementation
process (e.g., identifying root causes of performance challenges, developing and testing
theories of change)?
•
In what way do organizational cultures and climates support the activities necessary for
system partners to conduct and complete a quality assessment?
•
Are there recent or future organizational changes that may affect the state's child welfare
system, programs, and/or service delivery (e.g., leadership change)?
•
Are there organizational resources and infrastructure in place to support the assessment
process?
CFSR Statewide Assessment
3
Overview and Instructions
•
What changes in organizational capacity will be needed to complete a quality statewide
assessment (i.e., resources, infrastructure, knowledge and skills, culture and climate,
engagement and partnership)?
Availability and Use of Quality Data and Information
The statewide assessment represents a compilation of observations made about the state’s child
welfare system that is grounded in evidence. “Evidence is information that is used to support an
observation, claim, hypothesis, or decision. Evidence may be qualitative or quantitative and can
be found in or derived from a number of sources.” 3 Gathering and exploring data evidence begins
during problem exploration and continues over the course of implementing, assessing, and
sustaining change. The statewide assessment process entails looking at past, updated, and new
data to strengthen the team’s understanding of state child welfare system performance and to
identify the combination of data evidence used to determine:
•
Strengths and opportunities for improvement
•
Areas and factors influencing strong practice
•
Nature of the problem and affected populations
•
Variation in outcomes among populations of different races, ethnicities, cultures, sexual
orientations, and socioeconomic levels that may experience bias, inequities, or
underservice within their communities or by systems seeking to serve them
•
Contributing factors and underlying root cause(s) of the problem
This systematic development of evidence related to child welfare system performance may point
to areas where change, innovation, and/or replication of certain practices, procedures, or
policies may be warranted. This evidence then sets the stage for states to consider:
•
Hypotheses that are rooted in theories of change (predictions about how and why
needed change(s) will achieve the desired outcome)
•
Selection of and lessons learned from implemented strategies/interventions
•
Reasons to continue, modify, or discontinue the selected intervention, or revisit the
original understanding of the problem and the hypothesis for change
Data sources states should consider using, as available, for the statewide assessment process
include but are not limited to:
•
CFSR state data profiles and supplemental context data; CFR 45 § 1355.33(b)(2)
•
State child welfare agency information system data (e.g., SACWIS/CCWIS)
•
Administrative data from partner agencies (public-, private-, and community-based)
•
Information included in the CFSP and Annual Progress and Services Report (APSR),
e.g., National Youth in Transition Database
•
Annual Court Improvement Project reports, legal and judicial information systems, and
other data collected by the courts (e.g., quality hearing observation data)
•
Case record reviews
Source: https://fcda.chapinhall.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/2014-07-Principles-Language-andShared-Meaning_Toward-a-Common-Understanding-of-CQI-in-Child-Welfare.pdf
3
CFSR Statewide Assessment
4
Overview and Instructions
•
Child welfare studies (research, evaluation reports)
•
Surveys, stakeholder interviews, focus groups
Effective CQI change and implementation processes rely on high-quality and reliable evidence
from data to provide accurate information. Consider the following when assessing the quality of
evidence used for the statewide assessment and note this information where relevant:
•
Data source (see examples in section above)
•
Methods used to generate measures and analyze data (e.g., application of sound
measurement principles, process/individuals involved in analysis of data)
•
Relationship between the analysis produced and the questions asked (e.g., how results
of analysis are responsive to questions raised about performance; how they raised more
questions that are the focus of additional inquiry)
•
Scope of the data (e.g., geographic, population)
•
Representativeness of the population served or the subpopulation of interest (e.g.,
universe, random sample of records, selected sites or population, response rate)
•
Time period represented in the data, included in citations for the data source (e.g.,
CY2020, FFY2020; point in time (9/30/2020); or multiple years: CY2018–2020)
•
Completeness, accuracy, and reliability of the data (e.g., data quality tests performed
and the accuracy of results confirmed; same measure used over time; results consistent
with other data sources)
•
Other known limitation(s) of the data (e.g., an array of stakeholders reported data
integrity concerns; measure adjusted over time)
•
Policy decisions/practices that affect the quality and consistency of the data (e.g.,
implementation of new information system; timeframes to respond to CPS reports
changed; requirements for staff and/or provider training changed recently; new program
recently implemented)
The Statewide Assessment Template
The statewide assessment is completed by states and submitted to CB at least 2 months
before the case review (federal onsite or state-led review). The sections of the Statewide
Assessment template are outlined below and used to provide the most current and relevant
information for understanding state performance on child welfare outcomes assessed by the
CFSR, and evidence required to demonstrate routine statewide functioning of systemic factors.
Please see the CFSR Procedures Manual for additional information on completing the
statewide assessment.
Section I: Provide general information about the state child welfare agency; a list of the
stakeholders involved in completing the statewide assessment; and a description of how state
child welfare leadership and staff from all levels of the agency, families and youth, the legal and
judicial communities, Tribes, and key partners and stakeholders were actively engaged in the
assessment of the state child welfare system.
Section II: Briefly describe the state’s vision and organizational structure for the state’s child
welfare system, cross-cutting issues, factors affecting overall performance, and other statewide
drivers (e.g., consent decrees, transformation projects) that are not addressed in the outcomes
and systemic factor sections of this assessment.
CFSR Statewide Assessment
5
Overview and Instructions
Section III: Provide an updated assessment of state performance on safety, permanency, and
well-being outcomes and supporting practices. Include recent performance data, highlights of
strengths and opportunities for improvement, a brief summary of observations, priority focus areas
and results of problem exploration, and related CQI change and implementation activities, as
applicable.
Section IV: Provide a combination of the sources of evidence needed to determine whether the
state is in substantial conformity with the seven systemic factors. The systemic factors
encompass items associated with select CFSP requirements and seven systems within the
state that have the capacity, if routinely functioning statewide, to support child safety,
permanency, and well-being outcomes.
Appendix: Attach a copy of the CB-generated CFSR state data profile transmitted to the state to
use in completing the statewide assessment.
The Statewide Assessment template is available electronically on the CB website at
https://www.acf.hhs.gov/cb.
Preparation
As states prepare for the statewide assessment, CB recommends that states:
•
Review the CFSR Procedures Manual, “Statewide Assessment” section (available on
the CB website at https://www.acf.hhs.gov/cb, which provides guiding principles and a
framework for completing the statewide assessment.
•
Review the Capacity Building Center for States’ “Change and Implementation in
Practice” series. 4 The series is a collection of research-informed and user-friendly
resources (e.g., briefs, guides, videos) to help agencies achieve meaningful changes in
child welfare practice to improve outcomes and systemic functioning.
•
In collaboration with the CB Regional Office, identify and invite individuals to be
members of the statewide assessment team. Review information on stakeholder
involvement in the state’s assessment of the child welfare system.
•
Review the most recent versions of the following documents, which provide information
and past assessments of state performance on child and family outcomes and
supporting practices, and statewide routine functioning of the systemic factors:
-
PIP and PIP progress reports
-
Court Improvement Project self-assessment and strategic plan
-
•
CFSP and APSR
Review the following additional recent and relevant data:
-
Most recent CFSR state data profile and supplemental context information, providing
performance information on the CFSR statewide data indicators
-
State administrative data and aggregate performance information and measures
-
Other available statewide data, e.g., learning management system reports,
-
Case record review results
Capacity Building Center for States’ “Change and Implementation in Practice” series, available at
https://capacity.childwelfare.gov/states/focus-areas/cqi/change-implementation/
4
CFSR Statewide Assessment
6
Overview and Instructions
administrative data from partner agencies and contracted service providers, CIP data,
research and evaluation reports, surveys, stakeholder interviews, focus groups
•
Review the CFSR Procedures Manual, “Capacity Building Collaborative Data Support
Services” section, available on the CB website at https://www.acf.hhs.gov/cb, and
determine the need for additional guidance and technical support with any step of the
statewide assessment process, and request assistance as needed.
Instructions
State child welfare agencies, in collaboration with families and youth, the judicial and legal
communities, Tribes, and other key partners and stakeholders, complete an updated statewide
assessment of the state’s child welfare system and the state’s ability to achieve desired safety,
permanency, and well-being outcomes.
•
Develop the set of questions that when answered will provide the necessary information
to assess the state’s child welfare systems’ processes, programs, and practices.
•
Build on past work, including results of data exploration, progress made, lessons
learned, and adjustments from development, implementation, and monitoring of the
state’s most recent CFSR/PIP, CFSP/APSR, and CQI activities in completing this
section.
•
Determine whether other relevant quality data are available and/or needed to provide a
more recent and/or deeper understanding of state performance on the outcomes and
systemic factor functioning. Use current (or the most recent available) data and/or
information.
•
Assess the agency’s investment in the quality of programs and services to be delivered,
the processes by which they are delivered, and the capacity of the agency to deliver
them with fidelity.
•
Determine which quality data and information are the most compelling and why they
provide the best evidence to support the state’s assessment of (a) strengths and areas
needing improvement, and (b) statewide routine functioning of systemic factor items.
Include data/measure descriptions, the sources of data and/or information used, time
periods represented, and other information needed to understand the scope and quality
of data used.
•
Summarize the results of the assessment by responding to the questions that are
designed to solicit the most notable information about state performance, evidence of
key strengths and areas needing improvement, observations, results of data exploration,
and related CQI change and implementation activities, as applicable. CB recommends
that states concisely articulate the state’s observations and supporting evidence in no
more than 100 pages, beginning with Section I of this template.
CFSR Statewide Assessment
7
Section I—General Information
Statewide Assessment
Section I: General Information
Name of State Child Welfare Agency:
State Child Welfare Contact Person(s) for the Statewide
Assessment
Name:
Title:
Address:
Phone:
E-mail:
CFSR Statewide Assessment
8
Section I—General Information
List of Statewide Assessment Participants
Provide the names and affiliations of the individuals who participated in the statewide assessment
process and identify their roles in the process. Identify individuals with lived experience by
including an asterisk (*) after their name.
Name
CFSR Statewide Assessment
Affiliation
Role in Statewide
Assessment Process
9
Section I—General Information
Name
CFSR Statewide Assessment
Affiliation
Role in Statewide
Assessment Process
10
Section I—General Information
Description of Stakeholder Involvement in
Statewide Assessment Process
Describe how child welfare leadership and staff from all levels of the agency, families and youth,
the legal and judicial communities, Tribes, and other key partners and stakeholders were
actively engaged in the assessment of the state child welfare system.
Insert description:
CFSR Statewide Assessment
11
Section II—State Context Affecting Overall Performance
Section II: State Context Affecting Overall Performance
In this section, describe the vision and core components of the child welfare system, and how
the state is organized to produce the desired child welfare outcomes. Briefly outline crosscutting issues not specifically addressed in the outcomes and systemic factor sections of the
statewide assessment, and finally illustrate how current improvement initiatives provide
opportunities to achieve desired outcomes and system change.
We encourage states to consider the experiences of populations within the state that may
experience bias, inequities, or underservice―either in their communities or by the systems
seeking to serve them―with a focus on variations in outcomes for members of those
populations, and how their child welfare system processes, practices, and procedures may
either exacerbate or seek to ameliorate any inequities.
We recommend dividing this brief summary into three parts:
Part 1: Vision and Tenets
Briefly describe the vision and core tenets of the state child welfare system (i.e., primary
programs, including title IV-E prevention programs, as applicable; practice model; structure and
approach to drive change) that are designed to produce desired child welfare outcomes and the
routine statewide functioning of systemic factors.
Insert description:
Part 2: Cross-System Challenges
Briefly describe cross-cutting issues not specifically addressed in other sections of the statewide
assessment that affect the system’s programs, practice, and performance (e.g., legislation,
budget reductions, community conditions, consent decrees, staff turnover and workload).
Insert description:
Part 3: Current Initiatives
Briefly describe the cross-cutting improvement initiatives (e.g., practice model, new safety
model, workforce projects) to provide context for, and an understanding of, the priority areas of
focus from the last CFSR that were addressed through the state’s most recent PIP. This is an
opportunity to highlight current initiatives and progress made toward achieving desired
outcomes and systemic change.
Insert description:
CFSR Statewide Assessment
12
Section III—Assessment of Child and Family Outcomes
Section III: Assessment of Child and Family Outcomes
A. Safety
Safety Outcomes 1 and 2
Safety outcomes include: (A) children are, first and foremost, protected from abuse and neglect;
and (B) children are safely maintained in their own homes whenever possible and appropriate.
1. Performance Data Highlights
Highlight the most notable state performance and provide a brief summary of the state’s most
recent, relevant, and quality data pertaining to the CFSR Safety Outcomes and supporting
practices. Examples of relevant data: references to safety indicators in recent CB-generated
state data profile, case record review results, and administrative data such as state-generated
performance on the statewide safety data indicators and timeliness of face-to-face contact with
children who are subjects of screened-in CPS reports. Include a description of state-produced
measures (denominator and numerator), data periods represented, and methodology.
2. Brief Analysis
Briefly summarize the most salient observations, including strengths and areas needing
improvement, and findings across data sources and practice areas, by answering the
questions below. Consider how state RSP compares to national performance on the CFSR
safety data indicators, how current statewide case review performance compares to CFSR
Round 3 findings and PIP measurement, and the quality of the data.
•
What is the trend in performance over time, and is the state trending in the desired
direction? Are there changes in the denominator and numerator over time?
•
What information do other related data sources provide to inform state observations?
•
What does performance data from the legal and judicial communities show with
respect to the impact of court processes on safety outcomes?
•
What does performance data show with respect to the impact of prevention efforts on
safety outcomes?
•
What does the performance data identify as areas of strength?
•
What does the performance data identify as areas in need of improvement?
•
Are there data quality limitations (e.g., completeness, accuracy, and reliability)?
3. Results of Deeper Data Exploration for Priority Focus Areas
Identify areas prioritized for deeper data exploration and reasons for selecting those areas.
Briefly summarize results of data analysis, including evidence supporting the identification of
contributing factors and potential root causes driving strengths and challenges. Consider
observations from additional evidence that may have been gathered to deepen the state’s
understanding of the focus area (e.g., additional analysis of a target sub-population, qualitative
data such as caseworker surveys or focus groups with key stakeholders).
CFSR Statewide Assessment
13
Section III—Assessment of Child and Family Outcomes
•
What meaningful differences were identified for sub-populations, including specific
groups of children (e.g., age, race/ethnicity) and geographic location in the state?
•
What events, conditions, or factors contribute to or lead to the strength or challenge?
•
What supporting evidence is provided by key stakeholders (e.g., caseworkers,
supervisors, program managers, birth parents and youth, caregivers, and service
providers) regarding the contributing factors and/or root cause(s)?
•
Are there data or research findings pointing to the root cause(s) and/or contributing
factors?
4. Information Regarding CQI Change and Implementation Activities, As Applicable
Briefly describe how the information and results of the analysis above relate to or build on
results of prior data exploration and CQI change and implementation activities. Has
progress been made and/or have lessons been learned from development, implementation,
and monitoring of improvement activities included in the state’s most recent CFSR/PIP,
CFSP/APSR, and other systemic improvement processes? Are adjustments needed to
existing strategies/interventions/plans, or are new CQI change and implementation plans
needed to achieve desired outcomes?
CFSR Statewide Assessment
14
Section III—Assessment of Child and Family Outcomes
B. Permanency
Permanency Outcomes 1 and 2
Permanency outcomes include: (A) children have permanency and stability in their living
situations; and (B) the continuity of family relationships is preserved for children.
1. Performance Data Highlights
Highlight the most notable state performance and provide a brief summary of the state’s
most recent, relevant, and quality data pertaining to the CFSR Permanency Outcomes and
supporting practices. Examples of relevant data: references to permanency indicators in
recent CB-generated state data profiles, case record review results, and administrative data
such as time to permanency by permanency goal, percentage of children placed with
relatives/kin, percentage of children in foster care placed with some or all siblings; court
performance measures; and quality hearing review project results. Include a description of
the state-produced measures (denominator and numerator), data periods represented, and
methodology.
2. Brief Analysis
Briefly summarize the most salient observations, including strengths and areas needing
improvement, and findings across data sources and practice areas, by answering the
questions below. Consider how state RSP compares to national performance on the CFSR
permanency data indicators, how current statewide case review performance compares to
CFSR Round 3 findings and PIP measurement, and the quality of the data.
•
What is the trend in performance over time, and is the state trending in the desired
direction? Are there changes in the denominator and numerator over time?
•
What information do other related data sources provide to inform state observations?
•
What does performance data from the legal and judicial communities show with
respect to the impact of court processes on permanency outcomes?
•
What does the performance data identify as areas of strength?
•
What does the performance data identify as areas in need of improvement?
•
Are there data quality limitations (e.g., completeness, accuracy, and reliability)?
3. Results of Deeper Data Exploration for Priority Focus Areas
Identify areas prioritized for deeper data exploration and reasons for selecting those areas.
Briefly summarize results of data analysis, including evidence supporting the identification of
contributing factors and potential root causes driving strengths and challenges. Consider
observations from additional evidence that may have been gathered to deepen the state’s
understanding of the focus area (e.g., additional analysis of a target sub-population,
qualitative data such as caseworker surveys or focus groups with key stakeholders).
•
What meaningful differences were identified for sub-populations, including specific
groups of children (e.g., children entering foster care, children in foster care for longer
periods of time, child age and race/ethnicity) and geographic location in the state?
•
What events, conditions, or factors contribute to or lead to the strength or problem?
CFSR Statewide Assessment
15
Section III—Assessment of Child and Family Outcomes
•
What supporting evidence is provided by key stakeholders (e.g. caseworkers,
supervisors, program managers, birth parents and youth, caregivers, and service
providers) regarding the contributing factors and/or root cause(s)?
•
Are there data or research findings pointing to the root cause(s) and/or contributing
factors?
4. Information Regarding CQI Change and Implementation Activities, As Applicable
Briefly describe how the information and results of the analysis above relate to or build on
results of prior data exploration and CQI change and implementation activities. Has
progress been made and/or have lessons been learned from development, implementation,
and monitoring of improvement activities included in the state’s most recent CFSR/PIP,
CFSP/APSR, and other systemic improvement processes? Are adjustments needed to
existing strategies/interventions/plans, or are new CQI change and implementation plans
needed to achieve desired outcomes?
CFSR Statewide Assessment
16
Section III—Assessment of Child and Family Outcomes
C. Well-Being
Well-Being Outcomes 1, 2, and 3
Well-being outcomes include: (A) families have enhanced capacity to provide for their children’s
needs; (B) children receive appropriate services to meet their educational needs; and (C) children
receive adequate services to meet their physical and mental health needs.
1. Performance Data Highlights
Highlight the most notable state performance and provide a brief summary of the state’s
most recent, relevant, and quality data pertaining to the CFSR Well-Being Outcomes and
supporting practices. Examples of relevant data: case record review results, administrative
data such as participation in family team meetings, caseworker visits with children and
parents, children receiving timely well-child visits; service utilization rates. Include a
description of the state-produced measures (denominator and numerator), data periods
represented, and methodology.
2. Brief Analysis
Briefly summarize the most salient observations, including strengths and areas needing
improvement, and findings across data sources and practice areas, by answering the
questions below. Consider how current statewide case review performance compares to
CFSR Round 3 findings and PIP measurement, and the quality of the data.
•
What is the trend in performance over time, and is the state trending in the desired
direction?
•
What information do other related data sources provide to inform state observations?
•
What does performance data from the legal and judicial communities show with
respect to the impact of court processes on child well-being outcomes?
•
What does the performance data identify as areas of strength?
•
What does the performance data identify as areas in need of improvement?
•
Are there data quality limitations (e.g., completeness, accuracy, and reliability)?
3. Results of Deeper Data Exploration for Priority Focus Areas
Identify areas prioritized for deeper data exploration and reasons for selecting those areas.
Briefly summarize results of data analysis, including evidence supporting the identification of
contributing factors and potential root causes driving strengths and challenges. Consider
observations from additional evidence that may have been gathered to deepen the state’s
understanding of the focus area (e.g., additional analysis of a target sub-population,
qualitative data such as caseworker surveys or focus groups with key stakeholders).
•
What meaningful differences were identified for sub-populations, including specific
groups of children (e.g., age, race/ethnicity) and geographic location in the state?
•
What events, conditions, or factors contribute to or lead to the strength or problem?
•
What supporting evidence is provided by key stakeholders (e.g., caseworkers,
supervisors, program managers, birth parents and youth, caregivers, and service
providers) regarding the contributing factors and/or root cause(s)?
•
Are there data or research pointing to the root cause(s) and/or contributing factors?
CFSR Statewide Assessment
17
Section III—Assessment of Child and Family Outcomes
4. Information Regarding CQI Change and Implementation Activities, As Applicable
Briefly describe how the information and results of the analysis above relate to or build on
results of prior data exploration and CQI change and implementation activities. Has
progress been made and/or have lessons been learned from development, implementation,
and monitoring of improvement activities included in the state’s most recent CFSR/PIP,
CFSP/APSR, and other systemic improvement processes? Are adjustments needed to
existing strategies/interventions/plans, or are new CQI change and implementation plans
needed to achieve desired outcomes?
CFSR Statewide Assessment
18
Section IV—Assessment of Systemic Factors
Section IV: Assessment of Systemic Factors
The statewide assessment includes a review of 18 items associated with 7 systemic factors that
are used to determine the CFSR ratings for substantial conformity for each factor. For CFSR
Round 4, the expectation is that the statewide assessment team will use relevant, wellconstructed, valid, and defensible evidence that speaks to how well each systemic factor
requirement functions across the state.
The Children’s Bureau recognizes that in many states the information systems that house data
submitted to the federal government for AFCARS and NCANDS also contain a wealth of
administrative data that could be considered when evaluating the systemic factors. Where
possible, we recommend that states make use of these and other available data sets to
demonstrate systemic factor functionality.
Whether quantitative or qualitative evidence is used to demonstrate the functionality of systemic
factor items, states are strongly encouraged to use systematic processes to assess state
performance, include explanations regarding how well the data and/or information characterizes
statewide functioning, and provide information regarding the scope of the evidence used.
If the federal review team determines that the statewide assessment does not conclusively
demonstrate substantial conformity, the team may collect additional information through
stakeholder interviews during the onsite phase of the CFSR. Stakeholder interviews on the
Service Array and Case Review systemic factors, jointly conducted by the federal-state team, will
be held in all states.
States are encouraged to review the CFSR Round 3 Systemic Factors report for examples of the
combination of evidence used to demonstrate systemic factor functioning in Round 3, and the CB
information briefs developed for each systemic factor (https://www.acf.hhs.gov/cb/report/systemicfactors-results-cfsrs-2015-2018) that provide additional ideas and suggestions for demonstrating
functionality.
CFSR Statewide Assessment
19
Section IV—Assessment of Systemic Factors
A. Statewide Information System
Item 19: Statewide Information System
For this item, provide evidence that answers this question:
How well is the statewide information system functioning statewide to ensure that, at a
minimum, the state can readily identify the status, demographic characteristics, location, and
goals for the placement of every child who is (or within the immediately preceding 12 months,
has been) in foster care?
In your analysis:
Using relevant quantitative/qualitative data or information, briefly summarize the most salient
observations and findings, including strengths and areas needing improvement, by answering
the questions below. Ensure that you address each of the four components of this question.
•
What data sources were used/analyzed to inform state observations? Briefly describe
your analysis, including data periods represented, measures, and methodology.
•
Are there limitations to the evidence and information (e.g., completeness, accuracy,
reliability)? Briefly describe those limitations.
•
What does the evidence show with respect to the system functioning statewide?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas of strength?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas in need of improvement?
•
What does the evidence show with respect to how end users experience the statewide
information system?
•
How do the findings compare to CFSR Round 3 performance in this area? Describe
improvement efforts made during the PIP and/or CFSP, if applicable. To what extent
does current information reflect those improvements?
State Response:
CFSR Statewide Assessment
20
Section IV—Assessment of Systemic Factors
B. Case Review System
Item 20: Written Case Plan
For this item, provide evidence that answers this question:
How well is the case review system functioning statewide to ensure that each child has a written
case plan that is developed jointly with the child’s parent(s) and includes the required
provisions?
In your analysis:
Using relevant quantitative/qualitative data or information, briefly summarize the most salient
observations and findings, including strengths and areas needing improvement, by answering
the questions below. Ensure that you address each of the three components of this question.
•
What data sources were used/analyzed to inform state observations? Briefly describe
your analysis, including data periods represented, measures, and methodology.
•
Are there limitations to the evidence and information (e.g., completeness, accuracy,
reliability)? Briefly describe those limitations.
•
What does the evidence show with respect to the system functioning statewide?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas of strength?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas in need of improvement?
•
What does the evidence show with respect to families’ experience with the case
planning process?
•
How do the findings compare to CFSR Round 3 performance in this area? Describe
improvement efforts made during the PIP and/or CFSP, if applicable. To what extent
does current information reflect those improvements?
State Response:
CFSR Statewide Assessment
21
Section IV—Assessment of Systemic Factors
Item 21: Periodic Reviews
For this item, provide evidence that answers this question:
How well is the case review system functioning statewide to ensure that a periodic review for each
child occurs no less frequently than once every 6 months, either by a court or by administrative
review?
In your analysis:
Using relevant quantitative/qualitative data or information, briefly summarize the most salient
observations and findings, including strengths and areas needing improvement, by answering
the questions below.
•
What data sources were used/analyzed to inform state observations? Briefly describe
your analysis, including data periods represented, measures, and methodology.
•
Are there limitations to the evidence and information (e.g., completeness, accuracy,
reliability)? Briefly describe those limitations.
•
What does the evidence show with respect to the system functioning statewide?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas of strength?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas in need of improvement?
•
What does the evidence show with respect to stakeholders’ experience with the periodic
reviews process?
•
How do the findings compare to CFSR Round 3 performance in this area? Describe
improvement efforts made during the PIP and/or CFSP, if applicable. To what extent
does current information reflect those improvements?
State Response:
CFSR Statewide Assessment
22
Section IV—Assessment of Systemic Factors
Item 22: Permanency Hearings
For this item, provide evidence that answers this question:
How well is the case review system functioning statewide to ensure that, for each child, a
permanency hearing in a qualified court or administrative body occurs no later than 12 months
from the date the child entered foster care and no less frequently than every 12 months
thereafter?
In your analysis:
Using relevant quantitative/qualitative data or information, briefly summarize the most salient
observations and findings, including strengths and areas needing improvement, by answering
the questions below.
•
What data sources were used/analyzed to inform state observations? Briefly describe
your analysis, including data periods represented, measures, and methodology.
•
Are there limitations to the evidence and information (e.g., completeness, accuracy,
reliability)? Briefly describe those limitations.
•
What does the evidence show with respect to the system functioning statewide?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas of strength?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas in need of improvement?
•
What does the evidence show with respect to stakeholders’ experience with the
permanency hearing process?
•
How do the findings compare to CFSR Round 3 performance in this area? Describe
improvement efforts made during the PIP and/or CFSP, if applicable. To what extent
does current information reflect those improvements?
State Response:
CFSR Statewide Assessment
23
Section IV—Assessment of Systemic Factors
Item 23: Termination of Parental Rights
For this item, provide evidence that answer this question:
How well is the case review system functioning statewide to ensure that the filing of termination
of parental rights (TPR) proceedings occurs in accordance with required provisions?
In your analysis:
Using relevant quantitative/qualitative data or information, briefly summarize the most salient
observations and findings, including strengths and areas needing improvement, by answering
the questions below.
•
What data sources were used/analyzed to inform state observations? Briefly describe
your analysis, including data periods represented, measures, and methodology.
•
Are there limitations to the evidence and information (e.g., completeness, accuracy,
reliability)? Briefly describe those limitations.
•
What does the evidence show with respect to the system functioning statewide?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas of strength?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas in need of improvement?
•
What does the evidence show with respect to stakeholders’ experience with the TPR
process?
•
How do the findings compare to CFSR Round 3 performance in this area? Describe
improvement efforts made during the PIP and/or CFSP, if applicable. To what extent
does current information reflect those improvements?
State Response:
CFSR Statewide Assessment
24
Section IV—Assessment of Systemic Factors
Item 24: Notice of Hearings and Reviews to Caregivers
For this item, provide evidence that answers this question:
How well is the case review system functioning statewide to ensure that foster parents, preadoptive parents, and relative caregivers of children in foster care (1) are receiving notification
of any review or hearing held with respect to the child and (2) have a right to be heard in any
review or hearing held with respect to the child?
In your analysis:
Using relevant quantitative/qualitative data or information, briefly summarize the most salient
observations and findings, including strengths and areas needing improvement, by answering
the questions below. Ensure that you address both components of this question.
•
What data sources were used/analyzed to inform state observations? Briefly describe
your analysis, including data periods represented, measures, and methodology.
•
Are there limitations to the evidence and information (e.g., completeness, accuracy,
reliability)? Briefly describe those limitations.
•
What does the evidence show with respect to the system functioning statewide?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas of strength?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas in need of improvement?
•
What does the evidence show with respect to caregivers’ experience with the hearing
and review notification process?
•
How do the findings compare to CFSR Round 3 performance in this area? Describe
improvement efforts made during the PIP and/or CFSP if applicable. To what extent
does current information reflect those improvements?
State Response:
CFSR Statewide Assessment
25
Section IV—Assessment of Systemic Factors
C. Quality Assurance System
Item 25: Quality Assurance System
For this item, provide evidence that answers this question:
How well is the quality assurance system functioning statewide to ensure that it is (1) operating
in the jurisdictions where the services included in the CFSP are provided, (2) has standards to
evaluate the quality of services (including standards to ensure that children in foster care are
provided quality services that protect their health and safety), (3) identifies strengths and needs
of the service delivery system, (4) provides relevant reports, and (5) evaluates implemented
program improvement measures?
In your analysis:
Using relevant quantitative/qualitative data or information, briefly summarize the most salient
observations and findings, including strengths and areas needing improvement, by answering
the questions below. Ensure that you address each of the five components of this question.
•
What data sources were used/analyzed to inform state observations? Briefly describe
your analysis, including data periods represented, measures, and methodology.
•
Are there limitations to the evidence and information (e.g., completeness, accuracy,
reliability)? Briefly describe those limitations.
•
What does the evidence show with respect to the system functioning statewide?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas of strength?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas in need of improvement?
•
What does the evidence show with respect to stakeholders’ experience with the QA/CQI
process?
•
How do the findings compare to CFSR Round 3 performance in this area? Describe
improvement efforts made during the PIP and/or CFSP, if applicable. To what extent
does current information reflect those improvements?
State Response:
CFSR Statewide Assessment
26
Section IV—Assessment of Systemic Factors
D. Staff and Provider Training
Item 26: Initial Staff Training
For this item, provide evidence that answers this question:
How well is the staff and provider training system functioning statewide to ensure that initial
training is provided to all staff who deliver services pursuant to the CFSP so that:
•
Staff receive training in accordance with the established curriculum and timeframes for
the provision of initial training; and
•
The system demonstrates how well the initial training addresses basic skills and
knowledge needed by staff to carry out their duties?
“Staff,” for purposes of assessing this item, includes all contracted and non-contracted staff
who have case management responsibilities in the areas of child protection services, family
preservation and support services, foster care services, adoption services, and independent
living services pursuant to the state’s CFSP.
In your analysis:
Using relevant quantitative/qualitative data or information, briefly summarize the most salient
observations and findings, including strengths and areas needing improvement, by answering
the questions below.
•
What data sources were used/analyzed to inform state observations? Briefly describe
your analysis, including data periods represented, measures, and methodology.
•
Are there limitations to the evidence and information (e.g., completeness, accuracy,
reliability)? Briefly describe those limitations.
•
What does the evidence show with respect to the system functioning statewide?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas of strength?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas in need of improvement?
•
What does the evidence show with respect to participants’ experience with initial
training?
•
How do the findings compare to CFSR Round 3 performance in this area? Describe
improvement efforts made during the PIP and/or CFSP, if applicable. To what extent
does current information reflect those improvements?
State Response:
CFSR Statewide Assessment
27
Section IV—Assessment of Systemic Factors
Item 27: Ongoing Staff Training
For this item, provide evidence that answers this question:
How well is the staff and provider training system functioning statewide to ensure that ongoing
training is provided for staff that addresses the skills and knowledge needed to carry out their
duties with regard to the services included in the CFSP so that:
•
Staff receive ongoing training pursuant to the established curriculum and timeframes for
the provision of ongoing training; and
•
The system demonstrates how well the ongoing training addresses basic skills and
knowledge needed by staff to carry out their duties?
“Staff,” for purposes of assessing this item, includes all contracted and non-contracted staff
who have case management responsibilities in the areas of child protection services, family
preservation and support services, foster care services, adoption services, and independent
living services pursuant to the state’s CFSP.
“Staff,” for purposes of assessing this item, also includes direct supervisors of all contracted and
non-contracted staff who have case management responsibilities in the areas of child protection
services, family preservation and support services, foster care services, adoption services, and
independent living services pursuant to the state’s CFSP.
In your analysis:
Using relevant quantitative/qualitative data or information, briefly summarize the most salient
observations and findings, including strengths and areas needing improvement, by answering
the questions below. Ensure that you address all of the components of this question, including
the two bullets and all required staff as described above.
•
What data sources were used/analyzed to inform state observations? Briefly describe
your analysis, including data periods represented, measures, and methodology.
•
Are there limitations to the evidence and information (e.g., completeness, accuracy,
reliability)? Briefly describe those limitations.
•
What does the evidence show with respect to the system functioning statewide?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas of strength?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas in need of improvement?
•
What does the evidence show with respect to participants’ experience with ongoing staff
training?
•
How do the findings compare to CFSR Round 3 performance in this area? Describe
improvement efforts made during the PIP and/or CFSP if applicable. To what extent
does current information reflect those improvements?
State Response:
CFSR Statewide Assessment
28
Section IV—Assessment of Systemic Factors
Item 28: Foster and Adoptive Parent Training
For this item, provide evidence that answers this question:
How well is the staff and provider training system functioning to ensure that training is occurring
statewide for current or prospective foster parents, adoptive parents, and staff of state licensed
or approved facilities (who receive title IV-E funds to care for children) so that:
•
Current or prospective foster parents, adoptive parents, and staff receive training
pursuant to the established annual/biannual hourly/continuing education requirement
and timeframes for the provision of initial and ongoing training; and
•
The system demonstrates how well the initial and ongoing training addresses the skills
and knowledge base needed to carry out their duties with regard to foster and adopted
children?
In your analysis:
Using relevant quantitative/qualitative data or information, briefly summarize the most salient
observations and findings, including strengths and areas needing improvement, by answering
the questions below. Ensure that you address all of the components of this question, including
the two bullets and all required trainees as described above.
•
What data sources were used/analyzed to inform state observations? Briefly describe
your analysis, including data periods represented, measures, and methodology.
•
Are there limitations to the evidence and information (e.g., completeness, accuracy,
reliability)? Briefly describe those limitations.
•
What does the evidence show with respect to the system functioning statewide?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas of strength?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas in need of improvement?
•
What does the evidence show with respect to caregivers’ experience with foster and
adoptive parent training?
•
How do the findings compare to CFSR Round 3 performance in this area? Describe
improvement efforts made during the PIP and/or CFSP, if applicable. To what extent
does current information reflect those improvements?
State Response:
CFSR Statewide Assessment
29
Section IV—Assessment of Systemic Factors
E. Service Array and Resource Development
Item 29: Array of Services
For this item, provide evidence that answers this question:
How well is the service array and resource development system functioning to ensure that the
range of services specified below is available and accessible in all political jurisdictions covered
by the CFSP?
•
Services that assess the strengths and needs of children and families and determine
other service needs;
•
Services that address the needs of families in addition to individual children in order to
create a safe home environment;
•
Services that enable children to remain safely with their parents when reasonable; and
•
Services that help children in foster and adoptive placements achieve permanency.
In your analysis:
Using relevant quantitative/qualitative data or information, briefly summarize the most salient
observations and findings, including strengths and areas needing improvement, by answering
the questions below. Ensure that you address all four components of this question.
•
What data sources were used/analyzed to inform state observations? Briefly describe
your analysis, including data periods represented, measures, and methodology.
•
Are there limitations to the evidence and information (e.g., completeness, accuracy,
reliability)? Briefly describe those limitations.
•
What does the evidence show with respect to the system functioning statewide?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas of strength?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas in need of improvement?
•
What does the evidence show with respect to children and families’ experience with the
availability, accessibility, and delivery of services?
•
How do the findings compare to CFSR Round 3 performance in this area? Describe
improvement efforts made during the PIP and/or CFSP, if applicable. To what extent
does current information reflect those improvements?
State Response:
CFSR Statewide Assessment
30
Section IV—Assessment of Systemic Factors
Item 30: Individualizing Services
For this item, provide evidence that answers this question:
How well is the service array and resource development system functioning statewide to ensure
that the services in Item 29 can be individualized to meet the unique needs of children and
families served by the agency?
Services that are developmentally and/or culturally appropriate (including linguistically
competent), responsive to disability and special needs, or accessed through flexible funding are
examples of how the unique needs of children and families are met by the agency.
In your analysis:
Using relevant quantitative/qualitative data or information, briefly summarize the most salient
observations, including strengths and areas needing improvement, and findings by answering
the questions below.
•
What data sources were used/analyzed to inform state observations? Briefly describe
your analysis, including data periods represented, measures, and methodology.
•
Are there limitations to the evidence and information (e.g., completeness, accuracy,
reliability)? Briefly describe those limitations.
•
What does the evidence show with respect to the system functioning statewide?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas of strength?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas in need of improvement?
•
What does the evidence show with respect to children and families’ experience with
accessing and participating in individualized services?
•
How do the findings compare to CFSR Round 3 performance in this area? Describe
improvement efforts made during the PIP and/or CFSP, if applicable. To what extent
does current information reflect those improvements?
State Response:
CFSR Statewide Assessment
31
Section IV—Assessment of Systemic Factors
F. Agency Responsiveness to the Community
Item 31: State Engagement and Consultation With Stakeholders
Pursuant to CFSP and APSR
For this item, provide evidence that answers this question:
How well is the agency responsiveness to the community system functioning statewide to
ensure that in implementing the provisions of the CFSP and developing related APSRs, the
state engages in ongoing consultation with Tribal representatives, consumers, service
providers, foster care providers, the juvenile court, and other public and private child- and
family-serving agencies and includes the major concerns of these representatives in the goals,
objectives, and annual updates of the CFSP?
In your analysis:
Using relevant quantitative/qualitative data or information, briefly summarize the most salient
observations and findings, including strengths and areas needing improvement, by answering
the questions below. Ensure that you address all elements of this question.
•
What data sources were used/analyzed to inform state observations? Briefly describe
your analysis, including data periods represented, measures, and methodology.
•
Are there limitations to the evidence and information (e.g., completeness, accuracy,
reliability)? Briefly describe those limitations.
•
What does the evidence show with respect to the system functioning statewide?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas of strength?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas in need of improvement?
•
What does the evidence show with respect to stakeholders’ experience with the ongoing
consultation process?
•
How do the findings compare to CFSR Round 3 performance in this area? Describe
improvement efforts made during the PIP and/or CFSP if applicable. To what extent
does current information reflect those improvements?
State Response:
CFSR Statewide Assessment
32
Section IV—Assessment of Systemic Factors
Item 32: Coordination of CFSP Services With Other Federal Programs
For this item, provide evidence that answers this question:
How well is the agency responsiveness to the community system functioning statewide to
ensure that the state’s services under the CFSP are coordinated with services or benefits of
other federal or federally assisted programs serving the same population?
In your analysis:
Using relevant quantitative/qualitative data or information, briefly summarize the most salient
observations and findings, including strengths and areas needing improvement, by answering
the questions below.
•
What data sources were used/analyzed to inform state observations? Briefly describe
your analysis, including data periods represented, measures, and methodology.
•
Are there limitations to the evidence and information (e.g., completeness, accuracy,
reliability)? Briefly describe those limitations.
•
What does the evidence show with respect to the system functioning statewide?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas of strength?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas in need of improvement?
•
What does the evidence show with respect to children and families’ experience with
service coordination between child welfare and other federal programs?
•
How do the findings compare to CFSR Round 3 performance in this area? Describe
improvement efforts made during the PIP and/or CFSP, if applicable. To what extent
does current information reflect those improvements?
State Response:
CFSR Statewide Assessment
33
Section IV—Assessment of Systemic Factors
G. Foster and Adoptive Parent Licensing, Recruitment, and Retention
Item 33: Standards Applied Equally
For this item, provide evidence that answers this question:
How well is the foster and adoptive parent licensing, recruitment, and retention system
functioning statewide to ensure that state standards are applied to all licensed or approved
foster family homes or child care institutions receiving title IV-B or IV-E funds?
In your analysis:
Using relevant quantitative/qualitative data or information, briefly summarize the most salient
observations and findings, including strengths and areas needing improvement, by answering
the questions below.
•
What data sources were used/analyzed to inform state observations? Briefly describe
your analysis, including data periods represented, measures, and methodology.
•
Are there limitations to the evidence and information (e.g., completeness, accuracy,
reliability)? Briefly describe those limitations.
•
What does the evidence show with respect to the system functioning statewide?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas of strength?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas in need of improvement?
•
What does the evidence show with respect to stakeholders’ experience with state
standards being applied equally?
•
How do the findings compare to CFSR Round 3 performance in this area? Describe
improvement efforts made during the PIP and/or CFSP, if applicable. To what extent
does current information reflect those improvements?
State Response:
CFSR Statewide Assessment
34
Section IV—Assessment of Systemic Factors
Item 34: Requirements for Criminal Background Checks
For this item, provide evidence that answers this question:
How well is the foster and adoptive parent licensing, recruitment, and retention system
functioning statewide to ensure that the state complies with federal requirements for
criminal background clearances as related to licensing or approving foster care and
adoptive placements, and has in place a case planning process that includes provisions for
addressing the safety of foster care and adoptive placements for children?
In your analysis:
Using relevant quantitative/qualitative data or information, briefly summarize the most salient
observations and findings, including strengths and areas needing improvement, by answering
the questions below. Ensure that you address all components of this question.
•
What data sources were used/analyzed to inform state observations? Briefly describe
your analysis, including data periods represented, measures, and methodology.
•
Are there limitations to the evidence and information (e.g., completeness, accuracy,
reliability)? Briefly describe those limitations.
•
What does the evidence show with respect to the system functioning statewide?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas of strength?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas in need of improvement?
•
What does the evidence show with respect to stakeholders’ experience with the criminal
background check process?
•
How do the findings compare to CFSR Round 3 performance in this area? Describe
improvement efforts made during the PIP and/or CFSP, if applicable. To what extent
does current information reflect those improvements?
State Response:
CFSR Statewide Assessment
35
Section IV—Assessment of Systemic Factors
Item 35: Diligent Recruitment of Foster and Adoptive Homes
For this item, provide evidence that answers this question:
How well is the foster and adoptive parent licensing, recruitment, and retention system
functioning to ensure that the process for ensuring the diligent recruitment of potential foster
and adoptive families who reflect the ethnic and racial diversity of children in the state for
whom foster and adoptive homes are needed is occurring statewide?
In your analysis:
Using relevant quantitative/qualitative data or information, briefly summarize the most salient
observations and findings, including strengths and areas needing improvement, by
answering the questions below.
•
What data sources were used/analyzed to inform state observations? Briefly describe
your analysis, including data periods represented, measures, and methodology.
•
Are there limitations to the evidence and information (e.g., completeness, accuracy,
reliability)? Briefly describe those limitations.
•
What does the evidence show with respect to the system functioning statewide?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas of strength?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas in need of improvement?
•
What does the evidence show with respect to children and families’ experience with the
ensuring a diversity of foster and adoptive parent homes?
•
How do the findings compare to CFSR Round 3 performance in this area? Describe
improvement efforts made during the PIP and/or CFSP, if applicable. To what extent
does current information reflect those improvements?
State Response:
CFSR Statewide Assessment
36
Section IV—Assessment of Systemic Factors
Item 36: State Use of Cross-Jurisdictional Resources for Permanent
Placements
For this item, provide evidence that answers this question:
How well is the foster and adoptive parent licensing, recruitment, and retention system functioning
to ensure that the process for ensuring the effective use of cross-jurisdictional resources to
facilitate timely adoptive or permanent placements for waiting children is occurring statewide?
Please provide relevant quantitative/qualitative data or information that show the state’s process
for ensuring the effective use of cross-jurisdictional resources to facilitate timely adoptive or
permanent placements for waiting children is occurring statewide.
Please include quantitative data that specify the percentage of all home study requests received
to facilitate a permanent foster or adoptive care placement that are completed within 60 days.
In your analysis:
Using relevant quantitative/qualitative data or information, briefly summarize the most salient
observations and findings, including strengths and areas needing improvement, by answering the
questions below.
•
What data sources were used/analyzed to inform state observations? Briefly describe
your analysis, including data periods represented, measures, and methodology.
•
Are there limitations to the evidence and information (e.g., completeness, accuracy,
reliability)? Briefly describe those limitations.
•
What does the evidence show with respect to the system functioning statewide?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas of strength?
•
What does the evidence identify as areas in need of improvement?
•
What does the evidence show with respect to stakeholders’ experience with the
Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children process overall?
•
How do the findings compare to CFSR Round 3 performance in this area? Describe
improvement efforts made during the PIP and/or CFSP, if applicable. To what extent
does current information reflect those improvements?
State Response:
CFSR Statewide Assessment
37
Appendix—CFSR State Data Profile
Appendix: CFSR State Data Profile
Attach a copy of the CB-generated CFSR state data profile transmitted to the state for use in
completing the statewide assessment.
CFSR Statewide Assessment
38
| File Type | application/pdf |
| File Title | CFSR Round 4 Statewide Assessment |
| Subject | Statewide Assessment template, CFSR Round 4, Statewide Assessment |
| Author | Children's Bureau |
| File Modified | 2024-04-09 |
| File Created | 2021-05-06 |