Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
24823024
label
Introduction [The Community Child Protection Movement] [Draft]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
24823024
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Introduction [The Community Child Protection Movement] [Draft]
citationUrl
collections
Records of the First Lady's Office (Clinton Administration)
Nicole Rabner's Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
24823024
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
otherTitles
42-t-7763278-20121035S-053-011-2015
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
8d8a6cd7e54a7b8a
ocrText
DRAFT
Introduction
DRAFT
Do NOT CIRCULATE
OR REFERENCE
2
The Community Child Protection
Movement
There's a new movement building around the country. From
Michigan to Hawaii, communities are re-claiming their responsibility
to help keep children safe from abuse and neglect.
Underlying this community child protection movement is the belief
that protecting children from harm is everybody's concern.
T
n communities as diverse as Jacksonville, Florida, and Grand Rapids,
Michigan, Vormont, child protection is no longer just taking place in
government offices. State and local child protection agencies are
reaching outside their walls, often for the first time, to join with new
partners to strengthen families and keep children safe from
maltreatment
In these communities, child protection is happening everywhere-in
classrooms and churches, in domestic violence shelters and drug-
treatment centers, at corner groceries and child-care centers, in
beauty parlors and bowling alleys. It's happening wherever children
are found and wherever parents converge, whenever a neighbor
notices a child in need, a mother near the end of her rope, a father
who could use a hand.
The pioneers in this movement are building a neighborhood
network of services for families, based upon what parents tell them
they need and what we know works, whether it be help getting a job,
drug treatment, anger control counseling, or protection from an
abusive spouse. And parents are being asked to participate fully in
crafting solutions for their families that draw on their own strengths,
as well as support from relatives and close friends.
T
he traditional tools of child protection are still important,
including intensive family preservation services or swift and
purposeful government action to protect children when their parents
3
Connot: Foster care or adoption must-continue to be key ingredients
of a well-functioning child welfare system) However, other family
building tools have been added to the toolbox clear eyed
assessments of family strengths, casework based on achieving
solutions, participation by parents in self-help groups, individualized
plans for children's safety, a system of integrated services, help from
community groups, and even good old-fashioned neighborliness.I
- But this movement is more than just . Covey of improve support
services for families. It is a whole new philosophy and approach to
child protection, a coming together of neighbors and parents and
public and private agenciestall working together to promote the
up
safety of children.
4
Where
We've
Been
5
It's sometimes hard to remember that the nation's system for
reporting and responding to child abuse and neglect is still in its
infancy.
ommunity organizations shouldered most of the responsibility
for helping troubled families until well into the 20th Century. Not until
1963, after Colorado pediatrician Henry Kempe first described
Ibattered child syndrome,I did government begin to assume
a
primary role in responding to child By 1968, all states had
passed laws requiring mandatory reporting of child abuse and
neglect. But it wasn't until 1974 that Congress passed the first national
ANS or to aunten is
legislation aimed at child abuse Since then, state agencies and the
federal government have shared the costs of child protection efforts,
with states bearing an increasing portion of the financial burden.
Almost from its inception, the nation's child protection system has had
trouble keeping pace with the ever-rising number of abuse and
neglect reports and the growing complexity of family problems,
particularly substance abuse. Reports of abuse or neglect increased
45 percent between 1987 and 1996, when about 3 million children
were named in them. (About one-third of the reports were
substantiated by investigators.)
Although most media accounts focus on children with serious
physical injuries or sexual abuse, abuse can actually range from
inappropriate discipline on a single occasion to injuries inflicted over
time. And more than twice as many children are victims of neglect as
are victims of physical abuse. (Neglect, too, includes a range of
parental behaviors, from inadequate supervision to chronic, life-
threatening failure to meet a child's basic survival needs.)
Further complicating the picture, experts are not sure whether the
official numbers represent the true extent of the problem. Some
experts believe that the problem isn't as bad as the official tally
suggests. But others are convinced that the number of children who
are maltreated is actually much higher than the 1 million substantiated
cases a year. Based on information from providers of services to
6
children. the most recent National Incidence Study estimated that the
actual number of abuse and neglect victims in 1993 was 2.8 million²
ne sign of the strain on the current child protection system has been
the growth of the foster care population - from about 276,000 children
at the end of fiscal 1985 to-507,000 at the end of fiscal 1996. 3
There are other signs as well. Around the country, thousands of
families are tied up needlessly in intrusive investigations without
good cause, when all they may need is a helping hand. Many families
are reported repeatedly to authorities, without ever getting the
support they need, because the system lacks the resources to
respond Meanwhile,some children live in squalid or terrifying
home environments, and concerned friends or neighbors don't
know how to help: For some children, intervention comes too late or
not at all; in 1996, 1, 185 children died from abuse or neglect.4
Nearly every study of the child protection system has found it
overburdened, under-staffed, and too often unsuccessful in its
mission to protect. As long ago-4s-1990; the U.S. Advisory Board on
Child Abuse and Neglect declared that child maltreatment constituted
a Inational emergency,I requiring the treplacement of the existing
child protective system.I
As Marva Livingston Hammons, charged with child protection for the
state of Michigan, says: IOther agencies that have an interest in the
rights and needs of children have got to come to the table and work
closely with us to ensure that everything we can do to protect
children is done in a community partnership.I
7
Where
We're
Going
8
The community child protection movement grows out of the
experiences of child protection specialists and the families that have
been involved with the traditional child protection system.
oon after the U.S Admory Board called for reform in 1990, the
American Public Welfare Association brought 25 high-level child
in STATE AWA not Rs
welfare administrators together as the National Commission on Child
Welfare and Family Preservation. Among their recommendations
hatl(m)
were new community service networks based in neighborhoods,
earlier intervention in troubled families. more collaboration between
=
public agencies, and greater community involvement IThe mantle of
leadership must be assumed
not only by elected state and local
officials and designated executives, but also [by] families, our formal
and informal social and religious institutions, and employers who
have an interest in families and children as both consumers and
employees,I the commission said.
In 1993, the U.S. Advisory Board on Child Abuse and Neglect
elaborated on its eartier recommendations for a new system,, urging
a return to "a neighborly society" in which adults "resolve to be good
neighbors - to know, watch, and support their neighbors' children
and to offer help when needed to their neighbors' families."
With the consensus growing by the mid '90s that no one agency can
bear the sole responsibility for keeping children safe and that reform
Injut by
within public child welfare agencies alone is not enough states and
localities were beginning to develop a more comprehensive
approach to keeping children safe from maltr eatment A new vision
of child protection was emerging, one that would provide help to a
family before abuse occurs. That would provide services in
neighborhoods, rather than in inaccessible state office buildings.
That would take into account a family's needs and strengths, instead
of just investigating its faults. That would provide custom-tailored
services, instead of a one-size-fits-all approach.
9
T
eaders of the community child protection movement recognize that
one public agencylthe child protective services agencyl must
continue to assume legal authority to protect children. But the
thinking is that if a local network of parents, concerned neighbors,
and public and private agency service providers agree to share the
responsibility for safeguarding children, it will increase the
likelihood of quicker, more intensive, and more effective responses
to a child who is being abused or neglected - or is in danger of it.
ommunity child protection is already more than just a vision. All
around the country, new partners are sharing the responsibility for
protecting children and strengthening families - establishing local
goals, designing new systems of service delivery, and tracking their
successes. The partnerships look different from place to place,
depending upon local needs, resources and priorities. But in all of
them, child protection agencies are changing their internal practices
so they can be more responsive, and community partners are
helping provide the neighborhood-based supports and services that
families need. Everywhere, the safety and well-being of children are
paramount.
Who's involved in these efforts? The government agency charged
with protecting children is a key player, of course. But so are
numerous other partners I including neighbors, relatives, school
principals, clergy, police officers, corner grocers, pediatricians,
drug-treatment counselors, day-care providers, apartment managers,
and operators of shelters for refugees from domestic violence.
These people are in the best position to identify troubled families
early, and thus help protect children from harm. Through the
community child protection approach, they're learning what it takes
to keep children safe and how to act on that knowledge whenever
they see a child whose safety is at risk or a family that is struggling.
10
Building community partnerships for child protection isn't easy.
Neighbors are often nervous about intervening Agency turf issues
abound. Many parents view child protection agencies as child-
snatchers. rather than helpmates. And some CPS frontline workers
are still so accustomed to zeroing in on parents' flaws that they have
trouble seeing their strengths.
The community child protection movement will not solve all of the
problems of the child protection system Nor will we ever be able to
guarantee that every child will be protected from harm.
But across the country, more and more communities are stepping up
an
to say; We can and must do better by our children."
11
Community
Programs
12
Michigan Child Protection Community
Partners
When substantial federal child-abuse prevention funds became
available for the first time in 1995, Michigan's Family Independence
Agency started doing business differently. Rather than simply dictate
new programs to its 82 diverse counties, the agency asked the
counties to devise their own initiatives, based upon their particular
needs. The Strong Families/Safe Children initiative permitted
extraordinary community control over almost $17 million a year in
child-abuse prevention and early intervention services. Since then,
communities all across Michigan have been stepping forward to help
parents keep their children safe. And they are changing the financial
structure of child protection while they're at it. Note to Joanne: To
JOAnne:
me, the previous sentence, inserted by someone else, sounds
awkward, and we've already said that the state is doing things
differently. MS)
In 1998, the state gave counties more money-$7 million a year for
three years-and a new mandate: help the thousands of families that
the Family Independence Agency hasn't historically been able to
help, those named in unsubstantiated or low-risk substantiated
reports of abuse and neglect. (Research shows that such families are
often involved in more serious reports later on.) An extra $2 million
was awarded to counties that targeted children under age 4.
ons to Q them Michigan me
The recruitment of community partners coincides with the Michigan
agency's effort to become more solution-focused and family-friendly
Thorsees pole save is " a Clark siks
in all of its interactions with families. Statewide, all protective services
workers are being re-trained to involve families in making decisions
about how to keep their children safe and to collaborate with
community agencies.
Kent County, home of Michigan's second largest city, Grand Rapids,
provides a powerful example of community child protection in
13
practice. There, the death of a child from abuse caused years of
community soul-searching leading in 1996 to a community wide
effort to strengthen families.
Since early 1997. all calls to the child-abuse hotline in Kent County
have triggered a response. whereas resource constraints had
previously meant that allegations judged to be less serious often
drew no attention at all. State investigators still look into allegations of
sexual abuse or serious physical injury or neglect, and recommend
intensive in-home services or foster care as indicated. But
a
community-based Early Impacti prevention specialist links low-risk
families to in-home services they can access without stigma. In 1997,
about 1,100 more families received help than the year before, with
community partners like the Grand Rapids Foundation and Heart of
West Michigan United Way picking up the extra costs.
are
cross the state, many other communities using their share of the new
state grants to help protect children:
St. Joseph County has adopted a INo Wrong Doorl approach to
families, which means that a parent can get information about
help from any of 17 partner agencies. And since 1998, a trained
volunteer or public health worker has been visiting the home of
every newborn, linking the family to follow-up services as
needed. The county also offers in-home help to all families with
unsubstantiated maltreatment reports.
In rural Macomb County, the Family Coordinating Council is
offering voluntary in-home services to all families reported to
per
the hotline and judged to be low-risk. On busy shopping days,
volunteers fan out to grocery stores to hand out fliers about
community resources.
The Barry County Resource Network has enlisted community
agencies to provide in-home counseling, drug treatment and
homemaker skills-training during evening and week-end hours
to families with unsubstantiated or low-risk substantiated abuse or
neglect reports.
14
Through a three-county collaborative, Mason, Lake and Oceana
counties are offering parent education classes. an 800 number
for information and referrals. and a special parenting program
for teen mothers.
Family Navigator Project, Nanakuli,
Hawaii
It's mid-morning on Oahu's remote Wai'anae coast, and IBinniel
Rosa is on his way to visit a family involved in the Nanakuli Family
CPS
Navigator Project. The father died a few months before, and the
grief-stricken mother is having trouble getting out of bed. For no
good reason, two of her children are home from school today.
1 54 av & as
Binnie stops by a grocery to pick up breakfast. It's a Hawaiian
tradition to bring ho 'okupu- a gift - when you come calling.
Farther up the valley, LAuntiel Leina Hoohuli, the project's other
Inavigator,I has just helped Irma, a 49-year-old grandmother, into her
minivan. The grandmother recently lost a foot to diabetes. She's the
primary caretaker for her daughter's four children, so it's important
max nir
to restore not just her mobility, but her spirits, too. Auntie Leina is
taking her to sign up for the area's call-a-ride service. And then
they're going to lunch. ITo talk story,I Auntie Leina explains, using
the local phrase for sharing troubles.
These two scenes from a late winter day capture the essence of the Family
Navigator Project's approach to child protection.
The
Waianae Coast Coalition and the Legal Aid Society launched the
three-year pilot project in May 1997, with a grant from the Queen
Liliuokalani Children's Center and the blessing of the state child
ae ordered
protection agency, which views the project as a way to help families
without enmeshing them in the more legalistic child protection
system.
The Navigator Project aims to prevent child abuse and neglect by
linking families to a range of community resources, including drug
treatment, emergency financial assistance, parenting classes, legal
15
aid, and counseling. It operates in the native Hawaiian homestead of
Nanakuli, home to 1,000 families. many with three or four generations
living under the same roof. Unemployment. drug-use, welfare
dependency and referrals to child protective services are high;
incomes, test scores, and health indicators are low.
The work in Nanakuli is just-one example of Hawan's statewide
effort to build a. more localized, strengths based system that brings.
the community and state agency workers together around issues of
child safety. in 1990, two other three-year demonstration sites for the
community-based delivery of child welfare services began operating
on the Kona Coast-of the Big Island and in the Waipahu area of
Oahu Meanwhile, the CPS agency is planning to out-station child
protection workers in communities to help them forge closer ties.
Hardwick Area Patch,
Hardwick, Vermont
A storefront on Hardwick, Vermont's Main Street is a highly visible
symbol of a new approach to human services in this isolated rural
town.
Hardwick Area Patch opened its doors in March 1996 with the goal
of involving the area's 8,000 residents in making sure that the
community's children are ready for school, growing up in safe,
stable, supported families, and choosing healthy behaviors when
they reach their teens.
For years, Hardwick residents had to travel to other towns to find out about
services. Now, on any weekday they can walk into the Patch office
and get help from any of eight partner organizations five state
agencies (including the child protection agency), a mental health
center, a school district and a day-care center. The partners share
the costs of operating the office, and a dozen Hardwick residents
To
serve on the steering committee that runs it.
Ans (he) senting share providing The basis. styl
The Patch concept comes from England, where the word Ipatchi is
slang for neighborhood. The Patch principles are the same as those
of the community child protection movement: neighborhood-based
partner thing one
16
workers, co-location of key services, shared caseloads, community
networks of services and informal supports, and partnerships with
residents. The Patch approach has been implemented in five other
Vermont communities, plus a few other places around the United
States, including Tioga County, Pennsylvania, and Linn County,
Iowa.
In its first two years, Hardwick Area Patch:
developed a single intake form for the eight partner agencies.
conducted a door-to-door outreach campaign to identify
community needs and resources;
sponsored- IHand in Hand,I a month-long celebration of
community, in May 1998;
set up a Job Club, which offers regular workshops on such
topics as effective interviewing and resume-writing
began two weekly playgroups for preschoolers.
The Patch program builds on the other child protection
he
system reforms under way in the Department of Social and
Rehabilitation Services, Vermont's CPS agency. In many
Ansito pe. LPS when states is have
counties, Child Protection Teams comprising representatives
from schools, the community mental health agency, family
support centers and the CPS agency, meet regularly so they
can better help families. And in several pilot projects, state
names The stiff ave,hare tn but is not to of
small me
child protection specialists are using the problem-solving
technique called "family group decision making" to involve
relatives and friends in resolving child safety issues, rather
than leaving solutions to legal authorities.
ROOT
17
MILITARY PROGRAMS
18
I
In each of the nation's military services. responsibility for child
protection stretches from the parent all the way to a base's
commanding officer, with multiple partners in between. The
importance of the community's role is reflected in the names some
service branches have chosen for their responses to family violence:
ICoordinated Community Responsel for the Marine Corps,
ICoordinated Community with Carel for the Army.
M
ilitary families face the same challenges as all families, and then
some. Parents are more likely to be young when their first child is
born. They're often thousands of miles from the natural support
system provided by family and friends. A spouse can be deployed
away from home for months at a time, making the remaining parent a
de facto single parent. Moves are frequent, making it hard to put
Ambiguous sentence
down roots.
Devising a strategy to help families face these challenges would be
daunting even if they all lived in one place. But the 1.2 million
children in America's military families live on or near almost 300
military bases around the globe. Base-level prevention strategies
and interventions differ, depending upon local resources, but
they're all guided by the over-arching goal of strengthening families.
How does the military's approach to child protection look in the
field? A visit to Camp Pendleton, the nation's most populous Marines
Corps base, provides a glimpse.
amp Pendleton has about 40,000 active duty Marines who have
16,000 dependents living on or near the sprawling 125,000 acre base
north of San Diego. On any given day, nearly a dozen social
workers and nurses with the New Parents' Support Program are
visiting families with young children, right in their own homes, and
some fathers are honing their parenting skills at IDaddy's Baby Boot
Camp.I At the Armed Forces YMCA, several moms are talking about
19
common concerns as their toddlers play together nearby. while the
base's television station KPEN. is airing a program called
IChallenges Facing Military Families.I At kitchen tables in mobile
homes and apartments, volunteers from the base's LINKS program
are helping spouses new to military life understand the special
stresses of life in the armed forces. And all around the base.
prevention specialists from the Family Services Center are
convening classes on anger management single parenthood, power
and control issues, and household finances.
T
f maltreatment of a child is suspected, intervention is swift A case
manager from the Family Advocacy Program, the military agency that
deals with family violence issues, assesses the family. (If the
allegation meets the state's standard for a formal abuse or neglect
report, the local civilian child protective services agency will co-
investigate.) Once a month, the base's multidisciplinary Case Review
Committee studies all reports of child abuse or neglect, regardless of
whether a civilian agency has substantiated maitreatment. The team
advises the commanding officer on the case and suggests services
that might help the family. Help comes not just from military sources,
but from community agencies and organizations, too.
The Department of Defense credits its comprehensive, community-based
approach to child protection to helping keep the rate of substantiated
child abuse or neglect reports to 6 per 1,000 children per year since
1990, less than half the civilian rate of 15 per 1,000 children per year.
Forging Community
Partnerships
20
Since 1995. The Edna McConnell Clark Foundation has provided
seed money and technical assistance to community child protection
partnerships in four cities I Jacksonville, Florida; St. Louis, Missouri;
Cedar Rapids, Iowa, and Louisville, Kentucky Each site has its own
hallmarks. but all share the common goal of refocusing responsibility
for the safety of children in the community.
At each site, the state or county child protection agency, local
residents, community organizations and public agencies have
adopted clear goals to improve the lives of children and families. The
Partnerships are:
organizing a network of neighborhood and community supports
to reach families at risk
helping child protective services agencies change their
traditional policies and practices to become more family-
centered and to share some responsibility for child safety with
community groups and partner agencies.
making sure there's a carefully tailored plan of action for each
child at substantial risk of abuse or neglect, and work more
intensively with families with a pattern of mistreatment
developing & new decisionmaking process to guide community
child protection
Jacksonville Community Partnership for
the Protection of Children
When a call comes into Jacksonville's Project Reach about a family
in need, someone like Janice Dorsey responds. Whether the
problem is a family without housing, à teen parent in need of day
care, or a mother who's on the verge of abusing her child, Dorsey
and her colleagues are at the ready with referrals to organizations -
and people - who can provide help.
21
n
orsey, a Ifamily liaison workert for the Florida Department of
Children and Families, is one of the frontline workers in a new
approach to child protection in Florida's largest city.
The Florida Legislature paved the way for child protection reform in
1993 by mandating a change in the state child protection agency's
approach to troubled families. The legislation led to a system of
locally tailored services for troubled families and greater use of
informal community supports, such as neighbors, clergy and
grassroots organizations. (Reports of abuse and neglect that may
lead to criminal charges are still investigated by police alone or in
partnership with the stria agency.
The Jacksonville Children's Commission, local schools, state officials
and the United Way took the lead in establishing the Community
Partnership for the Protection of Children. Other partners include
managers of housing complexes, providers of services to domestic
violence victims and substance abusers, clergy, and business
owners. Concerned parents and local residents serve on the
oversight committee that sets policy for the Partnership.
The hub for the Partnership is Ribault School, one of Jacksonville's
full-service high schools, where Project Reach is based. Besides
family support workers, Project Reach houses child protection
specialists, juvenile officers, counselors, and workers who help
families apply for public assistance.
H
ow is community child protection practiced in Jacksonville?
Some state workers who provide child protection services are
based in the neighborhoods they serve.
Anyone can seek help for any family by telephoning 1First Call,I
a 24-hour hotline.
Local residents regularly canvass their neighbors to find out
what help they need and what resources are already in place.
22
At Hillton Village Apartments. management set up a Family
ONe OF word
Resource Center. complete with parenting crafts and GED-
preparation classes. a computer lab and recreational activities.
And residents took the initiative to designate a Isafe housel for
women and children who feel threatened at home.
- Parents Anonymous groups have formed in each targeted
neighborhood to-enable parents to get help with childrearing.
issues from their peers.
- The Department of Children and Families has paired a
caseworker from every child protection team with a caseworker
from Hubbard House, a shelter for victims of domestic violence,
so they can work together with families affected by both child
abuse and domestic violence Together the agency and
Hubbard House are developing a protocol to use when working
with such families.
- Scores of neighborhood residents have signed Icommunity
support agreements,I contracts in which they pledge their leyes
and earst to help assure a particular child's safety in his home.
With agreement from the local child protective services agency,
they check on the child regularly and help make sure the
parents are getting the help they need.
Louisville Community Partnership for
Protecting Children
When parents walk into Neighborhood Place Ujima, a one-stop
family resource center in an economically distressed area of
Louisville, Kentucky, they can be sure of getting whatever help they
need I whether it be emergency cash assistance for an unpaid
heating bill, treatment for a drug of alcohol problem, or advice about
dealing with the everyday stresses of family life.
N
eighborhood Place Ujima, in a wing of the family-friendly Duvalle
Education Center, is the hub of activities for Louisville's Community
Partnership for Protecting Children. In Swahili, Ujima means
"collective work and responsibility."
23
Louisville was selected as a Clark Foundation site because of ongoing
efforts by human services agencies there to provide a seamless web
of family support services at eight INeighborhood Placest-family
resource centers located throughout Jefferson County. All
Neighborhood Places share common goals of serving families better
and increasing school attendance. As a Clark site, Neighborhood
Place Ujima took on the additional mission of reducing child
maltreatment in its service area, which the time had a higher rate of
abuse and neglect reports than other parts of Louisville.
The Partnership was formed by 15 public and private agencies and
has since been joined by scores of community partners, including
ministers, day-care providers, and parents.
H
ow do families connect with the Partnership? Mostly, they're
referred by school officials, health care providers, ministers, or the
child-abuse hotline. But many ask for help themselves. Every parent
seeking help undergoes a comprehensive assessment to identify
unmet needs. All of the partner agencies, of course, have
specialized services to offer. But members of the Partnership's
Community Resource Team, which includes "neighborhood
partners" (residents who receive training and a stipend) and "natural
helpers" (trained volunteers) provide early intervention services not
customarily available from agencies - practical advice, some material
assistance, and referrals to community-based help.
T
n one typical situation, a member of the Community Resource Team
obtained phone service for a aught mother who was in danger of
losing custody of her severely disabled son if she didn't obtain a
phone. The team member also delivered a week's worth of
groceries, since the family's food stamps had been cut off when the
mother missed a recertification appointment while her son was
hospitalized. In another case, à Community Resource Team member
helped a pregnant teenager obtain housing, prenatal care, and food
24
stamps. When the baby was born three months prematurely and
seriously ill. the team member checked with the mother frequently.
providing moral support and links to services.
IShe helped me get through it,I the mother says. II feel as though I
can make it on my own now. They should have places like this
everywhere.l
Central to the Partnership's approach to families is use of a Ifamily
solutions problem-solving model that helps parents identify concrete
actions they can take to reduce the risk of harming their children.
And a "family group decision making" process is being used to
involve relatives and close friends in helping keep children safe,
particularly when parents' problems make it necessary for the
children to live apart from them.
One of the unmet needs the Partnership identified in the
neighborhood was for follow-up services for parents who had
undergone drug treatment. Drug or alcohol abuse are factors in
many child maltreatment cases, and relapse is common In 1998, the
Partnership hired a case manager to help recovering drug or alcohol
abusers stay drug- or alcohol-free. And because of requests from
the community, the Partnership made eight mini-grants for drug
abuse prevention programs aimed at youths.
Within a few years, several other Neighborhood Places in Louisville
expect to organize community partnerships around the goal of child
protection. And the Louisville Community Partnership is providing
leadership to five other community partnerships forming around
Kentucky State leaders are enthusiastic about the approach, and
eventually the community partnership approach may be adopted
statewide.
St. Louis Neighborhood Network
Safe children Healthy families. Strong communities. Those are the
goals of the St. Louis Neighborhood Network.
25
E-
he Network, operating in an economically distressed area of south
St. Louis. sits on top of several key building blocks:
The launch. in 1989. of Caring Communities. an integrated. inter-
agency. service delivery system at selected Missouri schools:
The establishment. in 1993. of a statewide public-private
partnership. called the Family Investment Trust to promote state
agency collaboration with communities;
The passage, in 1994, of a law that permitted 16 pilot sites across
Missouri to test a flexible state agency response to reports of
child abuse or neglect. In the pilot areas, most reports trigger an
assessment of the family's strengths and needs, followed by an
offer of voluntary services. Reports of sex abuse, serious
injuries and chronic life-threatening neglect are co-investigated
by the agency and the police. An independent evaluation has
to(2)
found that the dual-track approach has improved child safety,
gotten help to families earlier, and reduced repeat reports of
pet in area w in
abuse and neglect. In 1998, the Legislature has authorized
expansion of the dual-track approach statewide.
The St. Louis Neighborhood Network built upon and extended
these state-initiated reforms in two zip codes in south St. Louis that.
sisce
are characterized by a highly transient population, high levels of
economic distress, and a rate of reported child abuse and neglect
thrice the national rate. Here, parents, teachers, community leaders,
private agencies and the Missouri Division of Family Services are
collaborating on services that help parents take better care of their
children.
.Four lhubsI, based at schools and a neighborhood organization,
serve as centers of activity for localized networks of social service
providers, teachers, clergy, business owners and parents. Among
the hubs' projects in their first two years were establishment of
Parent Welcome Centers; organization of parent support groups
(including Parents Anonymous); sponsorship of several family fun
26
nights and community celebrations, and a computerized map of the
neighborhood that helps residents recognize and locate resources.
At each hub: trained family support workers. drawn from the
community. help families work on their problems and build on their
strengths so they can keep their children safe. The families are
encouraged to seek written "community support agreements" from
relatives, friends, neighbors, or community agencies willing to
pledge their help. At the Sigel Community Education Center hub, a
family support worker provides intensive in-home help to families
with children who are at risk of chronic neglect At a local day-care
center, another family support worker coordinates prenatal and
postnatal services for families with very young children, those at
highest risk for abuse or neglect.
Meanwhile, the I state child protection workers who are involved with
the Network are undergoing intensive training to help them learn
better ways to interact with families. About a dozen have actually een
out-stationed at the Sigel hub. And more and more, CPS workers are
using family conferencing - a problem-solving technique in which a
family's key formal and informal supports help them develop
individualized action plans to ensure the safety of its children.
Partnership for Safe Families,
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
The motto of the Cedar Rapids Partnership for Safe Families says it
all: Help is right next door.
Help is literally right next door I or only a few blocks away I in the
Five Three changed (van is bef we to info
neighborhoods served by the Cedar Rapids Partnership, which
operates out of three Cedar Rapids family resource centers. The
centers provide traditional social, public health and income
maintenance services, plus recreation, parent support groups,
from
preschool and community-building activities.
27
edar Rapids, Iowa's second largest city, was fertile ground for a
community child protection partnership. since several inter-agency
and public-private collaborations were already under wav. In 1991
us
the Brownstone Family Resource Center had begun using the
"Patch" approach to community-centered services. (In the Patch
approach. CPS staff and private service providers work together to
coordinate services for families in their own neighborhoods.) In
addition, Linn County was one of five areas of the state piloting a
flexible response approach to abuse and neglect reports - tailoring
interventions to each family's needs and strengths.
Among the groups and individuals who formed the
Partnership to build on these ongoing reforms were the state CPS agency, a community
action program, a child
welfare agency, the YWCA, a settlement house, county government, the United Way,
public schools, neighborhood
associations and parents' groups.
Today, the Partnership's family support workers help keep. -
children safe by assisting their families with parenting issues,
housing problems, domestic violence, health care and job-
training and employment services. They're augmented by
by 20 trained community residents, called "Neighborhood Partners,"
who provide all kinds of aid, from referring families to community
resources to lending them household cleaning supplies to organizing
block parties. Through the efforts of the Partnership numerous,
families have solved their problems without becoming statistics in the
state's child-abuse caseload
One of the most striking characteristics of the Cedar Rapids
Partnership is the strong sense of shared mission that's been forged
between the child protection and domestic violence communities.
Research shows that the two problems are intimately connected.
Through cross-training and regular case discussions, child welfare
and domestic violence caseworkers develop individualized case
plans for families that address the complex dynamics of -family
violence. As domestic violence expert Susan Schechter says,
28
"Children can't really be safe until their mothers are safe. The
community partnership approach may at long last help the child
protection and domestic violence communities to work togetherland
to create a more unified system for child and family protection.I"
29
A Growing
Movement.
30
The places you've read about here aren't the only ones in which the
community child protection movement is building Locally based
collaborative approaches to child protection are being tried all over
the United States, and in some places, they're already operating
statewide.
T
n Los Angeles County, about two dozen community-based networkers of service
agencies, schools, and county departments have formed to provide a more coordinated,
integrated approach to assuring child safety in families in eight distinct neighborhoods.
The effort, called the Family Preservation Network, serves families who haven't had
substantiated abuse reports, but whose children are at risk of being neglected or abused.
Each network tailors its services to meet the needs of the particular community it serves.
In New Orleans, a private community agency, Kingsley House, is
both assessing some families for the local CPS agency and providing
services to children in families that have been reported for neglect
And in Washington, D.C., seven community-based collaboratives
called Healthy Families/Thriving Communities are developing
neighborhood-driven child protection and family support service
delivery systems.
T
n addition to these local initiatives, many states are rethinking their
approaches to child protection. Throughout Oregon, the child
protection agency is using a family decision-making process that
utilizes family strengths, natural support systems (like relatives and
close friends) and community partners to ensure the safety of
children atrisk of abuse or neglect. In Virgimia, five counties and the
city of Portsmouth are operating a legislature-authorized, two-year
pilot program to test a dual-response system. In these areas, most
reports of child maltreatment are now being handled through a family
31
needs assessment approach, and local child protection agencies are
enlisting community partners to help provide services.
Since the early '90s. almost a dozen legislatures have mandated
Ventied ANS.TOQ.4 NCSL
sweeping changes in their child protection systems The most
common reform is adoption of a flexible-response system. For the
least serious reports of child maltreatment and those likely to be
unsubstantiated, this system generally permits state or county
agencies to assess the family's total situation and offer help as
indicated. Traditional investigative methods are reserved for serious
cases, such as sexual abuse, physical injury or life-threatening
neglect. In -1997 and 1998, seven states adopted flexible response
systems: South Carolina, Washington, Delaware, Texas, Arizona,
Nevada and Oklahoma
In addition, several legislatures have required their CPS agencies to
link with community-based organizations, such as schools, churches,
neighborhood organizations, and mental health providers, to help
support families. Iowa and Missouri were in the vanguard of this
approach. Similar reforms are expected to be considered in several.
other states in 1999.
With the increasing devolution of formerly federal responsibilities to
his wn
the states, more and more state legislatures and CPS agencies are
Joanney
beginning to recognize that they need new partners in the important
work of keeping children safe from abuse or neglect. The job is too
shu live to
big - and too important - for government to take on by itself.
Gary Stangler, director of the Missouri Department of Social
end withore
Services and president of the American Public Human Services
Association, sums up the philosophy of the community child
protection movement this way: IWe are in this together,I he says.
INeither state agencies nor communities can do it alone.
32
In the Words of Parents
33
Two parent talk about how community child protection partnerships
in their cities helped their families.
.4 Blessing in Disguise
When Christy first sat down in the Project Reach office in
Jacksonville, Fla., all she could do was cry. A spiteful relative had
told the state's child-abuse hotline that she was using drugs and
neglecting her children. It wasn't true. But Christy, a 34-year-old
single mother of two teens, did need help.
IWe were living in a real bad neighborhood where the kids couldn't
even go outside,I she said. IWe needed to move, but I didn't have
any money.I
A community liaison worker helped Christy move to a small house in
a better neighborhood. Then she and Christy set to work on the
family's other problems. The worker found beds for the children,
who'd been sleeping on the floor. She talked Christy into getting
treatment for her chronic depression. And she helped Christy enroll
the children in an after-school youth leadership program. Over time,
Christy's self-confidence improved so much that she traded her
welfare check for a job at a boarding home for the elderly.
For the first time in years, Christy looks forward to getting up every
day. 1My relative thought she was going to hurt me by calling the
hotline, but it ended up being a blessing in disguise,I Christy says.
.It was the only place I felt safe
One day, Cheryl B. wandered into Neighborhood Place Ujima in
Louisville's Duvalle Education Center, where her youngest children
attended preschool.
34
or
Administrato
Sylvia Johnson and CoordinatorGeorgia Eugene were
call!
talking in a hallway when Cheryl approached them, told them her
problems, and burstinto tears.
II was a desperate mother who needed help,I said Cheryl, 32. II had
five children I wasn't taking very good care of, and I was pregnant
again. I had been through a lot of physical and emotional abuse, and
I was on drugs. I had all these thousands of problems on my
shoulders, which made me angry about everything
IMiss Johnson looked at me and said, T'm going to see what we can
do.' I
heryl agreed that her children needed to go into foster care until she
got control of her own problems. And for the next 18 months, she
took advantage of nearly every service Neighborhood Place Ujima
offers, including psychological and drug abuse counseling,
parenting and household budgeting classes, a GED preparation
course, and vocational training. IThey helped me take my problems
off my shoulders, one by one,I Cheryl says.
Today, Cheryl works as an arena vendor and studies in a nurse's
aide training program. She hasn't used drugs for almost a year. She's
gotten her children back. And by everybody's account, she's a much
better mother.
"If it wasn't for everybody at Neighborhood Place Ujima, I'd be in
terrible shape," Cheryl says. "Most places you go to for help, they
work with you on one problem, or they can give you help just one
time a year. Whatever type of help I needed, they had it here."
CSSP to provide a resource page.
I Annual reports of National Committee to Prevent Child Abuse and Neglect and National
Center on Child Abuse and Neglect.
2 National Incidence Study, Department of Health and Human Services, 1996.
3 Voluntary Cooperative Information Systems (VCIS), February 1998.
4 Estimate of National Committee to Prevent Child Abuse.
35