42 Matching Annotations
  1. Sep 2023
  2. www.blueprintsprograms.org www.blueprintsprograms.org
    1. BOULDER COUNTY IMPACT:Building and Sustaining Policy, Practice and Improvement Standardsfor a Multi-Program, Multi-System Collaborative
    2. immediate & ongoing data-driven case planning Moving away from always least restrictive to matching
  3. May 2023
    1. n the short-term, OBH guidance allows for virtual visits for the next calendar year, whileencouraging face-to-face visits whenever possible
    2. take advanced Family First andtrauma-informed care trainings.
  4. Apr 2023
    1. Social Worker or Counselor has different levels of training and may practice independently or under alicensed supervisor. It is important to ask when making an appointment if the social worker or counselorhas specific child and family training

      AACAP says it's important to minimum, for LCSWs, to ask they have specific child and family training

    1. 26The Counseling PsychologistTable 1.Criteria and Related Measures for Assessing ExpertiseCriteriaPossible ways of assessing criteria1.PerformanceA.Client-rated working allianceB.Client-rated real relationshipC.Observer-rated responsivenessD.Use of observer-rated theoretically appropriate interventionsE.Observer-rated competenceF.Client-rated multicultural competenceG.Observer-rated responsivenessH.Supervisor-rated competence or responsiveness2.Cognitive functioningA.Observer-rated assessment of cognitive processingB.Observer-rated assessment of case conceptualization ability3.Client outcomesA.Engagement in therapy (percentage of clients who return after intake)/dropout ratesB.Clinically significant change on reports by clients, therapists, significant others, or observers using measures of symptomatology, interpersonal functioning, quality of life/well-being, self-awareness/understanding/acceptance, satisfaction with workC.Behavioral assessments (e.g., fewer missed days of work, fewer doctor visits)4.ExperienceA.Years of experienceB.Number of client hoursC.Variety of clientsD.Amount of trainingE.Amount of supervisionF.Amount of reading5.Personal and relational qualities of the therapistA.Self-rated self-actualization, well-being, quality of life, lack of symptomatology, reflectivity, mindfulness, flexibilityB.Empathy ability (self-rated, nonverbal assessments, observer ratings)C.Nonverbal assessments of empathy6.CredentialsA.Graduation from an accredited training programB.Board certification7.ReputationA.Professional interactionsB.Advancement to positions of honor within organizations based on recognition of clinical expertiseC.Positive feedback and referrals from clientsD.Reports from colleagues/friendsE.Invitations to demonstrate methods in videos, workshops, or booksF.Lack of ethical complaints8.Therapist self-assessmentA.Evaluation of own skillsNote. The criteria are listed in the order of perceived relevance to assessing expertise, from 1 (most relevant) to 8 (least relevan

      Thoughts: So far it appears there is no law about who can diagnose. What there is is: - description of a rubric to grade a expert witness - general description that states cannot operate outside area if training and competence (but how to define that area is absent) - core services / FFPSA law mandating evidence based, trauma Informed, Clearinghouse designated, best available science, meet particular needs of family - law (or in draft) defining trauma Informed - licensing and professional associations standards and code of ethics regarding non black and white values and efforts mandates - there are laws that say if you can call yourself a doctor, therapist, etc, but non if them limit what they can or cannot do - therefore, legally, anyone can diagnose anyone with anything, including DSM codes, and you can take money for it...you just can't call yourself any of the protected titles

      So, when it comes to who is "legally qualified" or a "legally allowed expert", (which is just the expert, and not ultimately the credibility of the "evaluation/recommendation" it comes down to just who can provide a stronger argument that the expert in question is "more expert" than the other "expert". It's the exact same concept as scientific theory. You can't "prove" a scientific theory. You can only provide increasingly stronger (ultimately just means, whether for good reasons or bad, the emotion that something feels stronger or better) arguments that it is true. As in you can't prove "expertise" or that an eval is correct. However, you can "disprove" expertise or scientific theory.

      In psychotherapy there is an enormous gap of a system that gives a credible prediction of what a "provider" is likely to soundly be able to evaluate (and further a system for them to soundly know when and how to refer out). Perhaps some kind of "certifications needed" section for each DSM code.

      So what you can do is: - used the defined law and prof orgs law and ethics as rubrics (like a grading table), the table in this paper is a good one to incorporate, to make an argument of strongest expert. - you can also get more than one expert or experts from different areas which have all of them agreeing - strategy: also send evaluation off to credible authority to get their endorsement - strategy: do that memorandum thing (ABA guide how to influence judges) to advance submit law and argument to judge - all of this is the exact same issue, concept, and strategy to battle "reasonable efforts"

    1. The court shall give great weight to the recommendation in the independent assessment. If the Court deviates from the recommendations in the assessment, the Court shall make specific findings of fact set forth in 19-1-115 (4)(h)

      The court shall give great weight to the recommendation in the independent assessment.

      If the Court deviates from the recommendations in the assessment, the Court shall make specific findings of fact set forth in 19-1-115 (4)(h)

      19-1-115 (4)(h): (h) In making a decision as to proper placement in a qualified residential treatment program, the court or the administrative review division shall consider the assessment provided by the qualified individual and the most recent assessment, as described in subsection (4)(e) of this section, and shall give great weight to the recommendation in the assessment when making a qualified residential treatment program placement decision. An assessment prepared by the qualified individual must identify whether a qualified residential treatment program is the most effective, appropriate, and least restrictive placement for the child or youth. The assessment must also identify child- or youth-specific short- and long-term goals for the child or youth and the family. If the court or administrative review division deviates from the qualified individual’s assessment and recommendation, the court or the administrative review division shall make specific findings of fact regarding the most effective, appropriate, and least restrictive placement for the child or youth and whether the placement is consistent with child- or youth-specific short- and long-term goals for the child or youth and the family. When making such findings of fact, the court or administrative review division shall consider all relevant information, including: (I) Whether the protocol for the qualified residential treatment program assessment was followed; (II) The strengths and specific treatment or service needs of the child or youth and the family; (III) The expected length of stay; and (IV) The placement preference of the child or youth and the family.

    1. (h) In making a decision as to proper placement in a qualified residential treatment program, the court or the administrative review division shall consider the assessment provided by the qualified individual and the most recent assessment, as described in subsection (4)(e) of this section, and shall give great weight to the recommendation in the assessment when making a qualified residential treatment program placement decision. An assessment prepared by the qualified individual must identify whether a qualified residential treatment program is the most effective, appropriate, and least restrictive placement for the child or youth. The assessment must also identify child- or youth-specific short- and long-term goals for the child or youth and the family. If the court or administrative review division deviates from the qualified individual’s assessment and recommendation, the court or the administrative review division shall make specific findings of fact regarding the most effective, appropriate, and least restrictive placement for the child or youth and whether the placement is consistent with child- or youth-specific short- and long-term goals for the child or youth and the family. When making such findings of fact, the court or administrative review division shall consider all relevant information, including:(I) Whether the protocol for the qualified residential treatment program assessment was followed;(II) The strengths and specific treatment or service needs of the child or youth and the family;(III) The expected length of stay; and(IV) The placement preference of the child or youth and the family.

      -See Official Benchcard

      The court shall give great weight to the recommendation in the independent assessment.

      If the Court deviates from the recommendations in the assessment, the Court shall make specific findings of fact set forth in 19-1-115 (4)(h)

    1. SEC. 202. ASSESSMENT AND DOCUMENTATION OF TH_ NEED FOR PLACEMENTIN A QUALIFIED RES- —_ IDENTIAL TREATMENT PROGRAM.

      FFPSA-253-Section-202.PDF

      US Code - SEC. 202. ASSESSMENT AND DOCUMENTATION OF THE NEED FOR PLACEMENT IN A QUALIFIED RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT PROGRAM

      Section 475A of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 675a) is amended

      The highlighted by them copy of the US Code used by the Colorado FFSPA Implementation Team

      The purpose of the Family First Prevention Act (Family First) Implementation Team is to implement the "Colorado Family First Prevention Services Act: A Road Map to the Future," created by the Family First Prevention Services Act Advisory Committee. The Family First Implementation Team is responsible to develop, deploy and monitor a plan to implement the specific defined topic area recommendations and activities within the Road Map. Objectives and outcomes include:

      • Ensuring Colorado Family First vision/values are being upheld
      • Defining/prioritizing areas of focus
      • Identifying and recruiting needed people for participation in implementation workgroups
      • Assuring an evaluation component accompanies implementation
      • Monitoring and reporting on implementation progress (use of data)
      • Developing and implementing a communication and education plan
      • Communicating and coordinating with Colorado Department of Human Services, Advisory Committee and The Delivery of Child Welfare Services Task Force

      https://bha.colorado.gov/family-first-prevention-services-act-implementation-team

    2. The quali-fied individual conducting the assessment, required
      The qualified individual conducting the assessment, required under subparagraph (A) shall work in conjunction with the family of, and permanency team for, the child while conducting and making the assessment.
      
      The family and permanency team shall consist of all appropriate biological family members, … as well as, as appropriate, professionals who are a resource to the
      family of the child, such as teachers, medical or mental health providers who have treated the child, or clergy.
      
      THE STATE SHALL document in the child’s case plan—
          (I) the reasonable and good faith effort of the State to identify and include all such individuals on the family of, and permanency team for, the child;
      
          (II) all contact information for member of the family and permanency team, as well as contact information for other family members and fictive kin who are not part of the family and permanency team;
      
          (III) EVIDENCE THAT MEETINGS of the family and permanency team, including meetings relating to the assessment required under subparagraph (A), are held at a time and place convenient for family
      
          (IV) if reunification is the goal, EVIDENCE demonstrating that the parent from whom the child was removed provided input on the members of the family and permanency team;
      
          (V) EVIDENCE that the assessment required under subparagraph (A) is determined in conjunction with the family and permanency team; and
      
          “(VI) [EVIDENCE^] the placement preferences of the family and permanency team relative to the assessment and, if the placement preferences of the family and permanency team and child are not the placement setting recommended by the qualified individual conducting the assessment under subparagraph (A), the reasons why the preferences of the team and of the child were not recommended.
      
      ‘“(C) In the case of a child who the qualified individual conducting the assessment under subparagraph (A) determines should not be placed in a foster family home, the qualified individual shall specify in writing the REASONS WHY THE NEEDS OF THE CHILD CANNOT BE MET BY THE FAMILY OF THE CHILD
      
    1. The American Professional Society on theAbuse of Children (APSAC) suggests thatthese children and families deserve anapproach that is collaborative, respectful,and includes interventions that are most likelyto lead to outcomes on family-identifiedand programmatic goals. This individualizedapproach is a focused, assessment-driven, andscience-informed approach that both favorsplans
    2. interventions should be selected based on the needs of the family and the availability of strategies and interventions wi

      interventions should be selected based on the needs of the family and the availability of strategies and interventions with the highest level of evidence

    3. Principles for Matching Change Strategies and/or Interventions to Key Desired Outcome

      *IMPORTANT***

    4. It is important to note, however, that only a minority of child welfare-involved children develop clinically significant levels of self-reported, post-traumatic stress symptoms, so assessment is essential (Kolko et al., 2010).
    5. CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT USER MANUAL SERIES

      Child Protective Services:A Guide for Caseworkers 2018

    6. Evidence-based practice is generally meant when the caseworker considers the current best evidence about a particular problem or need, family preferences, the specific family circumstances, and the practitioner’s clinical expertise (Gibbs, 2003; Shlonsky & Benbenishty, 2014)
    7. emphasized throughout this manual, it is crucial that agencies support families to receive tailored interventions or change strategies based on the families’ unique strengths and needs, best available research, practice exper-tise, and available resources
    1. level of care assessment is intended to be collaborative with the family, identified family supports and all who may be providing services and supports to the youth/

      ALL WHO MAY BE PROVIDING SERVICES AND SUPPORT

    2. placement provides the most effective level of care

      The COURT MUST approve placement provides MOST EFFECTIVE LEVEL OF CARE

    3. FAMILY FIRST 101

      Comprehensive training on FFPSA by the state

    1. Alienated adolescents’ stated preferences should domi-nate custody decisions.Practice recommendations.Custody evaluators and educativeexperts should be aware, and be prepared to inform the court, thatadolescents are suggestible, highly vulnerable to external influ-ence, and highly susceptible to immature judgments, and thus weshould not assume that their custodial preferences reflect matureand independent judgment. If an adolescent’s best interests wouldbe served by repairing a damaged relationship with a parent,evaluators’ recommendations and court decisions should reflectthe benefits of holding adolescents accountable for complying withappropriate authority. Although adolescents protest many of soci-ety’s rule and expectations, they will generally respond to reason-able limits when these are consistently and firmly enforced.8. Children who irrationally reject a parent but thrive inother respects need no intervention.Practice recommendations.Evaluators should be careful notto overlook an alienated child’s psychological impairments thatmay be less apparent than the child’s good adjustment in domainssuch as school and extracurricular activities. Evaluators can assistthe court’s proper disposition of a case by identifying the cogni-tive, emotional, and behavior problems that accompany irrationalaversion to a parent, as well as the potential long-term negativeconsequences of remaining alienated from a paren

      !!! IMPORTANT!!!

    1. But you are not allowed to be ignorant and incompetent, and destroy the lives of children and families. Not allowed. Know what you’re doing and do the right thing
    2. arents have the right to both expect and demand professional competence in the diagnosis and treatment of their children and families. That’s all we’re asking for.
    3. the vitae of the mental health professional. Review this vitae for evidence of professional training and experience in personality disorder pathology, family systems pathology, and attachment pathology
    4. Mental health professionals are NOT ALLOWED to abandon children to psychological child abuse
    5. I am deadly serious on this. Mental health professionals are NOT ALLOWED to collude with psychopathology that destroys the lives of children.
    6. the therapist only met with the child (and allied parent), and never met with the targeted parent to obtain relevant family history information from this parent’s perspective, then this may represent insufficient information to “substantiate” the diagnostic findings of the mental health professional, in possible violation of Standard 9.01.
    7. Standard 2.01: Boundaries of Competence In cases of attachment-based “parental alienation” the potential violations likely center on Standard 2.01: Boundaries of Competence, in which the mental health professional failed to possess the necessary knowledge and professional competence in personality disorder pathology, family systems pathology, and attachment trauma pathology necessary to assess, diagnose, and treat the particular type of pathology being evidenced in your family
    8. . I define these domains of professional competence in Chapter 11 of Foundations, specifically on pages 341-351. I did this for you. You can use the description of the required “Domains of Professional Competence” for the pathology of an attachment-based model of “parental alienation” (i.e., attachment-trauma reenactment pathology mediated by narcissistic/borderline personality pathology) to establish the boundaries of professional competence required under Standard 2.01 (and 9.01) of the Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct of the American Psychological Association.
    9. I am sometimes asked by an attorney representing their client to provide expert testimony in an ongoing court case involving the pathology of attachment-based “parental alienation.”   These requests will typically ask that I provide my expert opinion from the perspective of clinical psychology, child and family therapy, and child development, regarding information provided to me, such as child custody evaluations and treatment progress reports from therapists.
    1. Heitler agrees a support system is vital. Because targeted parents often experience severe symptoms of depression and anxiety as a result of feeling miscast, she is intentional about outlining the difference between warranted estrangement from children (based on prior abuse in the household) and being alienated (based on no factual forms of abuse in the household before separation) to help reality test a client under the spell of manipulation.
    2. “What’s happening in outpatient reunification therapy is not only not helping [but] it’s making things far worse,” Baker stresses. “One major problem in general is that clinicians often let these cases go on and on with middle-of-the-road treatments without getting to the underlying cause. Many therapists let these cases go for years without saying, ‘Gee, I’m not really doing anything good here.’” “There’s this false belief that it’s impossible to tell what’s really going on,” she continues. But “it’s not impossible to tell if clinicians were trained specifically in this subspecialization.”
    3. Bernet developed the five-factor model, which is an effective method to use when diagnosing parental alienation. This model includes five criteria for diagnosis: Contact refusal: Is the child refusing contact with a parent? Previous relationship: Did the child previously have a positive relationship with the rejected parent? Lack of abuse: Does the rejected parent show signs of being abusive or neglectful Alienating behaviors: Is the preferred parent engaging in alienating behaviors? Child symptoms: Is the child manifesting symptoms of alienation?
    4. “Parental alienation leads to highly complicated and difficult cases that require far more knowledge and specialization,” notes Amy Baker, a psychologist and parental alienation expert who has written over 65 peer-reviewed articles on the matter. “In other words, even seasoned clinicians with experience in family systems are still, in a way, a novice when dealing with alienation. Humility would be the most important thing for clinicians to have in this regard.”
    1. Family Therapy. Functional family therapy (FFT) is a family-based prevention and intervention program for high-risk youths ages 11–18. It concentrates on decreasing risk factors and increasing protective factors that directly affect adolescents who are at risk for delinquency, violence, substance use, or behavioral problems such as conduct disorder or oppositional defiant disorder. FFT is conducted over 8–12, 1-hour sessions for mild cases; it includes up to 30 sessions of direct service for families in more difficult situations. Sessions generally occur over a 3-month period and can be held in clinical settings as an outpatient therapy model or as a home-based model. In one large-scale study on FFT, which was delivered by community-based therapists, Sexton and Turner (2010) found that when adherence to the FFT model was high, FFT resulted in a significant reduction in felony crimes and violent crimesand a nonsignificant decrease in misdemeanor crimes. In addition, a study by Celinska and colleagues (2013) foundthat FFT had a positive effect on youths in the areas of reducing risk behavior, increasing strengths, and improving functioning across key

      "Functional Family Therapy"

    1. Mental health professionals who can diagnose mental illness or can explain issues of bonding and attachmen

      IMPORTANT

      Expert witnesses are common in child maltreatment cases. Examples of expert witnesses include:

      professionals who can diagnose mental illness or can explain issues of bonding and attachmen

      the expert’s opinion needs to be relevant, which means that it needs to increase the likelihood that a particular fact is true or that a particular condition exists. Th e expert’s testimony also needs to have a sound scientific basis

    2. Expert testimony is opinion testimony about a subject that is outside the judge or jury’s knowledge or experience. The witness needs to show that she is qualified to testify as an expert on a particular subject. Th ese qualifications may be based on experience; education and training; professional accomplishments, recognition, and memberships; prior testimony as an expert; or familiarity with the relevant professional literature.

      Important

      DHS's requirements must meet the minimum standards the court has for expert counsel as when they are needing expert counsel

    3. CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT USER MANUAL SERIES

      Working with the Courts in Child Protection

      Honorable William G. Jones

  5. docdrop.org docdrop.org
    1. An Assessment Summary will be created at the end of the assessment and given to the referring party

      5 An Assessment Summary will be created at the end of the assessment and given to the referring party: • Clinical recommendations, Level of care recommendations, Time spent in a QRTP to date, History of services, If consensus was achieved during Family and Permanency meeting (consensus is not required), Major findings from the Child and Adolescent Needs and Strengths (CANS) tool, Short and long-term clinical goals

    2. A full psychosocial assessment:•Face to Face with child•Meets with family•Connects with collateral informants: schools, GALs, religious leaders, case workers, current/previous providers, DYS•Reviews documentation: hospital discharges, DYS assessments, school assessments, etc.•Attends Family and Permanency Meeting•Uses the Child and Adolescent Needs and Strengths (CANS) tool to help identify goals, guide decisions making•The Assessor must specify why the needs of the child cannot be met by the family of the child or in a foster family home or any other level of care•The lack of availability of a lower level of care is not a justification for QRTP services
    1. Qualified Individual” means a trained professional or licensed clinician, as defined in the federal “Family First Prevention Services Act”. “Qualified Individual” must be approved to serve as a Qualified Individual according to the state plan. “Qualified Individual” must not be an interested party or participant in the juvenile court proceeding and must be free of any personal or business relationship that would cause a conflict of interest in evaluating the child, juvenile, or youth and making recommendations concerning the child’s, juvenile’s, or youth’s placement and therapeutic needs according to the federal Title IV-E state plan or any waiver in accordance with 42 U.S.C. sec. 675a

      Is the QI free of business relationship, conflict of interest, in making recommendations or affiliation with placement setting?

      C.R.S. 19-1-103 (87.7) C.R.S. 26-6-102 42 U.S.C. sec. 675a