If the child is removed, request a copy of the family’s prevention plan to review what the agency offered and whether reasonable efforts have been made to prevent removal (if necessary, request through the discovery process). If reasonable efforts were not made, request a “no reasonable efforts” finding at the first hearing, and an order returning the child to the family with appro-priate services

Family First Prevention Services Act: Judicial and Legal Practice ConsiderationsAfter a Petition is Filed: Child in Foster CareSeptember 15, 2021

Family First Prevention Services Act: Judicial and Legal Practice ConsiderationsBefore a Petition is Filed: Prevention ServicesSeptember 1, 2021

Megan KearsleyFamily UnitCourt Improvement Program CoordinatorState Court Administrator’s Officemegan.kearsley@judicial.state.co.usCristina Ritchie Cooper, Esq.Senior AttorneyABA Center on Children and the Lawcristina.cooper@americanbar.orgJennifer Mullenbach, Esq.Deputy County AttorneyCounty Attorney's Officejmullenb@co.jefferson.co.usAshley Chase, Esq.Staff Attorney & Legislative LiaisonOffice of the Child’s Representativeashleychase@coloradochildrep.orgAlison Butler, Esq.Carrie Ann Lucas Disability Advocacy DirectorOffice of Respondent Parents Counselabutler@coloradoorpc.org

Mobile:303-927-8786Jon.Steinmetz@State.CO.US

Andrew Gabor at andrew.gabor@state.co.us.

The information in this section was developed by the Colorado Department of Human Services and the Colorado Human Services Directors Association for Colorado's Family First Implementation Guide for County Directors.

Prudence Beidler Carr, prudence.beidlercarr@americanbar.orgƒ Cristina Ritchie Cooper, Cristina.Cooper@americanbar.org

BOULDER COUNTY IMPACT:Building and Sustaining Policy, Practice and Improvement Standardsfor a Multi-Program, Multi-System Collaborative

Caseworkers must be familiar with evidence-based programs and services available to children, youth,and families that reside in your community. Caseworkers not only need to know what services areavailable, but also the target population and desired outcomes of these services so they can makeappropriate referrals. Family First eligibility should not be a driver of these decisions, but rather theneeds and goals of the child, youth and family

two service tracks have been identified:1. Services designed to meet the mental health needs of the child or youth.2. Services designed to improve family functioning, which may include addressing youth delinquent behavior.

Colorado’s vision is that all children, youth, parents or kin caregivers with these risk factors will be eligible for Title IV-E prevention services—both those who are involved in the child welfare system and those who have not been the subject of a child maltreatment report but share characteristics that deem them at serious risk of out-of-home placement.

Reunification, adoption or guardianship arrangements that are at risk of disruption

the existing system cannot just be modified; rather, a fundamental shift in service delivery and support to families must occur.

Functional Family Therapy

Contents

ColoradohasastrongfoundationandhistoryofprovidingpreventionandearlyinterventionservicesthroughtheuseofCoreServices,IV-EWaiverinterventions,CMPsandintegratedhumanservicesdelivery

Thepriorityistoprovideservicestothoseinneedasearlyaspossibletostrengthenfamilies,boosthealthandwell-being,andavoidmoredifficultandcostlycriseslater

Thus“childwelfare”meanssomethingmuchbroaderinthisstate;withawidearrayofsupports,Coloradoaimstoaddresstherootcausesofcrisisandinstabilitythroughintegratedpreventionandservicedeliveryfocusedonsupportingwholefamilies

TitleIV-EWaiverDemonstrationProject(Waiver).TheColoradoWaiverfocusedonfiveinterventionstobuildonexistingchildwelfarepractice:FamilyEngagement,PermanencyRoundtables,Trauma-InformedAssessment,Trauma-InformedTreatmen

Coloradohasintentionallydesignedabroaddefinitionofcandidacyforplacementpreventionservicesthatpushestoservechildren,youthandfamiliesasearlyaspossibleand,ideally,beforeareportismadetothechildwelfaresystem.

ColoradohasapproachedFamilyFirstimplementationasabroadsystemstransformationeffortthatcutsacrossmultipleofficeswithintheColoradoDepartmentofHumanServices(CDHS),includingtheDivisionofChildWelfare(DCW),OfficeofBehavioralHealth(OBH),OfficeofEarlyChildhood(OEC),andOfficeofEconomicSecurity(OES).Otherstateagencies,includingtheColoradoDepartmentofHealthCarePolicyandFinancing(HCPF)andtheColoradoDepartmentofPublicHealthandEnvironment(CDPHE)havebeenessentialinensuringaholisticapproachtoimplementation

The IMPACT organization.

I would have preferred a “Yes/No” option for this question. I believe that Boulder County’s prevention services are better than most districts and we can do so much better at the same time. The IMPACT partnership in Boulder County should be a state and national model. Money diverted from savings by not committing clients is key to providing more services in the community. Many other districts struggle with prevention due to funding and there seems to be a gap in how this is accomplished. Providers are struggling to stay open and are constantly dealing with hardships due to funding. Great therapist and support workers often leave organizations that serve this population due to low pay. The key to making the Family First initiative a success is creating and maintaining a robust, well-funded system of care in communities. A system of care that incentivizes front line workers. These service providers are currently under funded and the work is difficult, which is a recipe for poor service delivery.

The Family FirstPrevention Services Actin ColoradoAN IMPLEMENTATION GUIDEFOR COUNTY DIRECTORS

caseworkers in Trails will be promptedto complete an individualized prevention plan for each child or youth identified. That plan is currentlytitled the Treatment/Prevention Plan a

In Trails, caseworkers must fill out the IV-E CandidacyDetermination Form (Job Aide) to determine whether a child or youth is a “candidate for preventionservices.

Family First Prevention Services by Colorado Lab

There are two main-levelquestions in the IV-E PreventionCriteria section.10. Click a radio button for thedesired response (only oneradio button can be selected).Note: If the selections made inthe IV-E Candidacy section arechanged, all answers in the IV-EPrevention Criteria panel will bedeleted.

HOUSE BILL 11-1196

When considering a request for removal, ask if the agency madereasonable efforts to prevent removal, which may include providingfederally supported prevention services.• If reasonable efforts have not been made, consider court orders forprevention services that may allow the child to remain safely at home.• Consider relevance of prevention services outside dependency &neglect context. Who else could benefit from prevention upstream?

If reasonable efforts were not made, request a “no reasonable efforts”finding and an order returning the child to the family with appropriateservices.

If the child is removed, request a copy of the family’s prevention plan (orother reflection of prevention services) to review what the agency offeredand whether reasonable efforts have been made to prevent removal

Reasonable efforts to prevent removal: If a petition must be filed afterservices provided, prepare evidence of the prevention services offeredand used as an element of the agency’s reasonable efforts.

Consider citing information on:Reasonable efforts to reunify

When necessary, argue to the court that by not pro-viding a reunified child with appropriate services, the agency is not making mandated reasonable efforts to achieve permanency

Providing states improved access to federal funds for reunification services aligns with the federal Children’s Bureau’s renewed focus on reasonable efforts to achieve permanency requirements. Families should be provided all needed assistance to ensure the safe reunification of the child. (See reasonable efforts resources in Research to Cite: Reunification Services for the Family.)

Judicial decision maker❑When reviewing a petition for removal, ask if the agen-cy made reasonable efforts to prevent removal, which may include providing federally supported prevention services. ƒInvite discussion and debate among parties about whether the reasonable efforts finding is appropri-ate. ƒIf reasonable efforts have not been made, consider court orders for prevention services that may allow the child to remain safely at home. ƒIf reasonable efforts have been made, be specific about what measures constituted reasonable efforts when making written findings in the case

If the child is removed, request a copy of the family’s prevention plan to review what the agency offered and whether reasonable efforts have been made to prevent removal especially in cases involving mental health, substance use, and parenting skills challenges (if neces-sary, request the prevention plan through the discovery process)

Key Federal Laws to Incorporate into Advocacy

parties need not wait until the next scheduled hearing for a child to return home if safety risks have been addressed. Indicate whether a motion for an accelerated hearing is needed for reunification to occur

Ensure reunification services begin promptly

reunification services that can begin as soon as a child enters foster care

The Title IV-B Family Reunification Services section de-scribes the services that should be provided to a child and family when the child has been removed from the home “to facilitate the reunification of the child safely and appropri-ately within a timely fashion and to ensure the strength and stability of the reunification.”60 These services may include counseling, substance use treatment, assistance to address domestic violence, peer mentoring, visitation, and transpor-tation

Placement determinations using evidence-based assessments

through evidence-based, trau-ma-informed treatment models

Family First Act requires state and tribal child welfare agencies develop procedures and protocols to prevent children from being inappropriately diag-nosed with mental illness

Research to Cite

Include individuals with lived experiences as par-ents, children, or kin caregivers in the foster care system to discuss what would best serve family prevention services needs in the community

Explore with child welfare stakeholders and local legal service providers whether to access IV-E funding for this area.

If prevention services were not offered before remov-al and the case involves mental health, substance use, or parenting skills, consider whether a fair hearing is warranted pursuant to federal regulations. These regu-lations provide that failure to offer or render prevention services is a possible basis for requesting an administra

If federally funded prevention services were used before the child’s removal, ask whether they were provided with fidelity (e.g., according to written policy, frequency of service, targeted group).

If you are appointed after a petition for removal is filed, advocate for prevention services to be offered as an al-ternative to removal—including services for the parent, kinship caregiver, or the child.

If you are appointed when prevention services are provided, work with your client to ensure those services meet the client’s needs

If you are appointed after a petition for removal has been filed, ask whether prevention services were offered before removal—including services for the parent, kinship caregiver, or child. If appropriate for your client’s goals, advocate for prevention services as an alternative to removal

The requirements for these services do not prohibit a state from offering other prevention services through state and local dollars or the more limited federal funding available through Title IV-B, Subpart 2, the Promoting Safe and Stable Families Program.8 Indeed, a broad service array responsive to specific community needs is encouraged and Family First funding may be just one funding stream used to support a more comprehensive service array.

rendered by a “qualified clinician.”

The Family First Prevention Services Act of 2018A Guide for the Legal Community

IMPLEMENTING THEFAMILY FIRST PREVENTION SERVICES ACTA Technical Guide for Agencies, Policymakers and Other Stakeholders

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

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

Family Involvement & After Care•Family members will be involved in treatment

FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS FORPREVENTION SERVICES

COLORADO IMPLEMENTATIONCORE VALUES

preventionservices that are evidence-based

FAMILY FIRST 101

An Assessment Summary will be created at the end of the assessment and given to the referring party

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

FAMILY FIRST IMPLEMENTATION

For Dependency & Neglect Cases: The Court always conducts the initial review following placement. If all parties consent, subsequent reviews can be conducted by the ARD. The ARD’s first review in these cases would be prior to the 90th day of placement.  The ARD review considers the independent assessment, initial and ongoing CANS, clinical documentation, progress in treatment up to the date and all other relevant case information provided by the county to determine if QRTP placement is and continues to be the most appropriate level of

community. Access the analysis of residential providers’ transition plans, which shows the latest information on providers ready for QRTP approval that will be approved in Trails on October 1; providers that have submitted a complete application to become a QRTP and are close to approval; facilities pursuing a PRTF license; and facilities pursuing other options. CDHS Licensing is providing one on one coaching, transition planning and technical assistance to facilities that are applying to become a QRTP and/or need to adapt their business model.  Transition Funding: SB21-278 requires that CDHS assist residential placement providers in transitioning to models that are Title IV-E and medicaid eligible with Colorado Transition Act funding. About $1.1 million of the state’s transition funds were awarded in grants to providers.  Joint CDHS and HCPF Town Halls on Family First Providers cover up-to-date information on the following topics: Child placement rates for provider types; New rates for treatment and therapeutic foster care and age-based rates for standard foster care developed by the Foster Care Workgroup that will take effect July 1st; Identified QRTP needs and updated provider QRTP application process and information about aftercare services; HCPF rule clarification and implications; PRTF placement type and new rates; and Resources - where to find answers and how to get technical assistance. A recording of the June 3rd town hall can be accessed here. Notes for quick reference are also available to Directors on CHSDA’s site.

CDHS has developed a set of key strategies, based on stakeholder input, for rightsizing and refining the placement continuum. If there are no QRTP beds available when needed, county staff will need to find the next most appropriate, least-restrictive placement and treatment option until a QRTP placement becomes available.

The court must then “determine and approve” the QRTP placement within 60 days and find that the placement provides the most effective, least restrictive level of care, and is consistent with the permanency plan. If any party objects to QRTP placement or the independent assessment does not recommend QRTP level of care, the court hearing must be within 30 days of placement instead of 60. Judges, magistrates and other judicial system partners (Dependency and Neglect and Delinquency) have access to training on Colorado’s QRTP Benchcard and the independent assessment process. County directors also have access to QRTP Benchcard training specific to child welfare practice.

The independent assessment process includes a full psychosocial assessment (CANS), direct contact with the child or youth, family or caregivers, interviews with a variety of professionals, and a Family and Permanency meeting. An assessment summary will be created at the end of the assessment and given to the referring party. The summary will include level of care recommendations, clinical recommendations, history of services, time spent in a QRTP to date, if consensus was achieved during the Family and Permanency meeting, findings from the psychological assessment tool, and short- and long-term clinical goals. The Qualified Individual must specify why the needs of the child cannot be met by other levels of care. A lack of lower-level placement options is not a justification for QRTP placement.

ASOs will have access to Qualified Individuals in other regions and they are trying to share resources during this initial phase of implementation. If an ASO does not have available Qualified Individuals, they will need to inform OBH and DCW immediately so they can problem solve to ensure that the assessment is done within the timeframes. I

The CDHS Office of Behavioral Health contracts with the Administrative Service Organization (ASO) in your region, who is then responsible for contracting directly with and hiring the Qualified Individual(s) needed and managing quality assurance. Qualified Individuals must be licensed behavioral health professionals, trained in the Child and Adolescent Needs and Strengths (CANS) tool and take advanced Family First and trauma-informed care trainings. As of October 1, 2021, the independent assessment process for all counties is up and running. ASOs continue to be concerned about Qualified Individual capacity, workforce shortages and waitlists.

The entire assessment process from the time of referral to the completed assessment summary is completed within 14 days. Ideally the process should be completed before placement, but it must be completed within 10 business days of placement if that’s not possible. Federal funding for a child/youth/juvenile in QRTP placement is initially allowed for up to 30 days and then only allowed past that timeframe if the independent assessment determines that a QRTP is the appropriate level of care.

At that meeting, everyone will discuss treatment and care goals and determine if QRTP is the level of treatment required. This recommendation as well as the Independent Assessment will be presented to a judicial officer who will make the final determination

Counties will notify family members, children and youth about the process and will schedule a family and permanency meeting within eight days of the referral for an Independent Assessment to bring all concerned parties together. During those eight days, the Independent Assessment will be completed.

The Independent Assessment is used to develop a shared treatment and care plan

The Independent Assessment is completed by a licensed behavioral health professional who completes a full psychosocial assessment, reviews all provided documentation, meets with the child or youth, speaks with a wide variety of individuals, and has completed a robust set of training. The CANS tool is used after the psychosocial assessment to help the behavioral health professional identify key needs and strengths with the family and child or youth. The CANS tool is also used to frame the assessment in a measurable way and to work with all parties involved to gain a consensus of the needs and strengths

Qualified Individuals are licensed behavioral health professionals who have advanced training in trauma, cultural considerations, Family First requirements and the placement continuum, and are contracted directly with the Administrative Service Organizations and overseen by the CDHS Office of Behavioral Health. The Qualified Individuals will be completing the Independent Assessment.

Once a county or the Division of Youth Services (DYS) determines a child or youth may benefit from treatment at a QRTP, the county will make a referral for an Independent Assessment. The Colorado Department of Human Services has contracted with the regional Administrative Services Organizations (ASOs) to implement the Independent Assessor process in Colorado

What process will the local agency use to determinewhich Family First supported prevention service

Who decides if prevention services have been com-pleted or more services are needed to ensure the childdoes not enter foster care or if a foster care placement isnecessary?

The Family First Act requires state child welfare agenciesto develop a protocol to prevent children from beinginappropriately diagnosed

What state protocols already exist to ensure children infoster care are not inappropriately diagnosed

Can all caseworkers make determinations about pre-vention services or will there be distinctions between“prevention” caseworkers and “protection” caseworkers?If these are distinct, do they have different reporting re-quirements, case obligations, and duties?

how can the child be protected againstmisdiagnosis?

Judicial RolesPrevention services supported through Family First areprovided before any petitions have been filed with thecourt.

Judicial Rolesƒ Should judges ask about the use of state protocols toconfirm diagnoses were properly made in individualcases?

In addition to prevention services supportedthrough Family First, what other services does theagency have to offer the family to prevent the needfor removal (e.g., housing assistance, child careassistance, food security, legal services to addressunmet legal needs)?

The Family First Transition Act temporarily suspends the requirement that at least 50% of title IV-E prevention services expenditures be for “well-supported” practice for two fiscals years

The Family First Prevention Services Act (Family First) creates an expanded entitlement/50% reimbursement of federal funds to provide services to keep children and youth safely with their families.

Supported and well-supported services in Colorado’s prevention plan should be paid for using the Core Services Program allocation, Child Welfare Services Block, or State General Fund.

26-5.3-105. Eligibility requirements - period of eligibility - services available.(1) Families with children at imminent risk of out-of-home placement shall be eligible for emergency assistance. Assistance shall be available to or on behalf of a needy child under twenty-one years of age and any other member of the household in which the child lives if:

Emergency assistance provided pursuant to this article shall be used for, but shall not be limited to, the following: (a) Twenty-four-hour emergency shelter facilities or caretakers for children who must be removed from their homes in emergency situations; (b) Counseling, including crisis counseling available by telephone twenty-four hours a day; (c) Information referral; (d) Intensive family preservation services; (e) In-home supportive homemaker services; (f) Services used to develop and implement a discrete case plan, as provided by the federal “Social Security Act”; (g) Day treatment services for children.

26-5.3-105. Eligibility requirements - period of eligibility - services available.(1) Families with children at imminent risk of out-of-home placement shall be eligible for emergency assistance. Assistance shall be available to or on behalf of a needy child under twenty-one years of age and any other member of the household in which the child lives if:

Find a Program or Service

Find a Program or Service

While older youth, like younger children, usually come into care for multiple reasons, the most common reasons for older youth are the Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AFCARS) categories of neglect, child behavior problem, and caretaker inability to cope. Effective prevention services for older youth will need to respond to these removal reasons and likely need to enlist the behavioral health system to formulate effective interventions.

Below are a few examples for attorneys who represent children and parents to consider in their trial court and appellate advocacy. Enforce the reasonable efforts provisions. Federal law requires the child welfare agency make reasonable efforts to prevent placement of children in foster care and to finalize the permanency plan if the child is placed. A recent article by Jerry Milner and David Kelly of the Children’s Bureau reinforced the experience of many: The reasonable efforts provisions are not often invoked to leverage service delivery at the trial court or fair hearing level or at the appellate level, so that obligation can be clarified and enforced. Enforce the requirements for fair hearings. Attorneys should advocate zealously for reasonable efforts to prevent removal or, if the facts warrant, for a finding that reasonable efforts have not been made. Federal law and regulation require that states provide a mechanism for fair hearings for denials of service and benefits under Title IV-E. Failure to provide appropriate pre-placement prevention services are among the issues that can be challenged in a fair hearing. Fair hearings provide an additional forum to consider challenges that could result in the improvement of prevention and reunification services for families with older youth who are not being served in a manner that responds to their needs. Because the FFPSA funds only two categories of prevention services and requires that they be evidence-based, the reasonable efforts requirement continues to be a vital legal requirement that can help ensure specific prevention services to families. When lawyers bring challenges in a coordinated way (such as organized efforts to identify cases for appeals and fair hearings), they can move jurisdictions to prioritize investments in prevention.

Below are a few examples for attorneys who represent children and parents to consider in their trial court and appellate advocacy. Enforce the reasonable efforts provisions. Federal law requires the child welfare agency make reasonable efforts to prevent placement of children in foster care and to finalize the permanency plan if the child is placed. A recent article by Jerry Milner and David Kelly of the Children’s Bureau reinforced the experience of many: The reasonable efforts provisions are not often invoked to leverage service delivery at the trial court or fair hearing level or at the appellate level, so that obligation can be clarified and enforced. Enforce the requirements for fair hearings. Attorneys should advocate zealously for reasonable efforts to prevent removal or, if the facts warrant, for a finding that reasonable efforts have not been made. Federal law and regulation require that states provide a mechanism for fair hearings for denials of service and benefits under Title IV-E. Failure to provide appropriate pre-placement prevention services are among the issues that can be challenged in a fair hearing. Fair hearings provide an additional forum to consider challenges that could result in the improvement of prevention and reunification services for families with older youth who are not being served in a manner that responds to their needs. Because the FFPSA funds only two categories of prevention services and requires that they be evidence-based, the reasonable efforts requirement continues to be a vital legal requirement that can help ensure specific prevention services to families. When lawyers bring challenges in a coordinated way (such as organized efforts to identify cases for appeals and fair hearings), they can move jurisdictions to prioritize investments in prevention.

Title IV-E funds available to reimburse jurisdictions for attorneys for parents andchildren are separate and distinct from IV-E funds available for prevention servicesunder FFPSA.

Title IV-E funds available to reimburse jurisdictions for attorneys for parents andchildren are separate and distinct from IV-E funds available for prevention servicesunder FFPSA.

Counties will continue to use their Child Welfare Block, Core, Collaborative Management Program and other funding sources such as Promoting Safe and Stable Families grants, as well as partner with prevention partners and local providers, to provide a continuum of prevention services that best meet the needs of families in their communities. [see:“What funding opportunities are available to help build a continuum of prevention programs in your area?”]

Family First requires that states ensure that, “consistent with the agency’s five-year title IV-E prevention plan, section 471(e)(4)(B) of the Social Security Act requires the title IV-E agency [CDHS] to provide services or programs to or on behalf of a child under an organizational structure and treatment framework that involves understanding, recognizing, and responding to the effects of all types of trauma and in accordance with recognized principles of a trauma-informed approach and trauma-specific interventions to address trauma’s consequences and facilitate healing.”

Primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention services can be expensive to build and sustain. Partnerships with your behavioral health, public health, home visiting, juvenile justice, collaborative management program, and others in your county and/or region will be key.  Reach out to and start a conversation with your local providers and state partners at CDHS that oversee respective prevention programs.More information is also available in a recorded lunch and learn session, “Funding to Support Prevention Services and Cross-System Financing Strategies,” hosted in partnership by CDHS and CHSDA:  Session Recording and Powerpoint. Counties will continue to use their Child Welfare Block, Core Services Program, Collaborative Management Program and other funding sources, to provide a continuum of prevention services that best meet the needs of families in their communities.  Federal Family First Transition Act Funds: The Family First Transition Act provides critical funding and flexibility to ensure a smooth and successful roll-out of Family First in Colorado. CDHS received over $7.7 Million in transition funding to spend flexibly on implementation efforts. Due to the overwhelming interest from stakeholders regarding the use of transition funds, the Department created a diverse 15-member group, 6 of whom represent county human service departments, in July 2020. The group is charged with reviewing and prioritizing funding proposals and developing recommendations for the Department. Funding opportunities on the prevention services side include: From 2020-2023, CDHS will be awarding up to $1.5 million ($500,000 each calendar year) for efforts that align with 1) Expanding the prevention services continuum in a way that addresses locally identified needs, meets Family First requirements, addresses inequities across the state, and emphasizes cultural responsiveness, and/or 2) Addresses known and potential barriers to Family First implementation. CDHS selected awards for the second round of Family First transition fund grants to support local Family First implementation activities in September 2021.More information about the recipients of awards  is also available: first round awardees; second round awardees. Federal Title IV-E Prevention in the Colorado Child Abuse Prevention Trust Fund: The new federal reimbursement that Colorado receives on Title IV-E prevention services will be deposited into the Colorado Child Abuse Prevention Trust Fund and distributed via an RFP process for purposes of building and expanding programs and services identified in the federal clearinghouse or under evaluation for purposes of petitioning the federal government for inclusion in the clearinghouse. Note: A separate fund is available within the Trust Fund for mini-grants for training on child sexual abuse prevention and training on strengthening protective factors. Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF):  Individual county allocations are derived from Colorado’s county block grant using a formula based on economic and demographic factors. TANF funds beyond basic cash assistance are designed to be flexible and can be used for a wide array of services and supports. County departments of human/social services have flexibility in determining the most effective approach for accomplishing the four federal purposes of TANF within their local area and within the parameters established by the state and federal government (Broad-based eligibility: lawfully present, income under $75,000, and a child in the home). Counties in many cases can use their TANF allocations and local reserves for prevention programs. Title IV-B Promoting Safe and Stable Families: SSF funds are awarded via an RFP process for purposes of providing family support services, family preservation services, reunification services, and adoption support services. PSSF awards include a match requirement for 30% of all awarded funds. Awards have been granted for the next five-year funding cycle (FFY 2022-2027), which begins October 2021. The next solicitation will be released 2026. Eligible applicants for a PSSF solicitation include County Departments of Social/Human Services, local Government agencies, and any private or not-for-profit community-based organization. Entities that are not a county department of human services will require a letter of support for the county departments of human services in the counties where they will be offering services. 2021 Stimulus funding: Colorado received an additional $847,869 in stimulus funds for PSSF as a part of COVID relief. This one-year funding is likely to support the first cohort of Child First sites. Reach out to Jill Jordan (jill.jordan2@state.co.us) for more information. Medicaid: Coordination with your Regional Accountable Entity (RAE) and Medicaid will be vital. When considering where Medicaid may be able to pay first before other funding streams for Family First prevention services, a good place to start is with a conversation with the RAE and county at the table together. Counties can also reach out to local providers directly. There is also a group working on the claiming logistics in seeking to address Medicaid as the “Payer of first resort.” You can reach out to Brad Borges (bradly.borges@state.co.us), Ann Bartholomew (ann.bartholomew@state.co.us), and Kelly Sawka (kelly.sawka@state.co.us) for more information.  Home Visiting: Historically, home visiting programs in Colorado have used a myriad of funding sources to build and sustain services. Colorado uses a combination of the following funding sources to fund different home visiting programs. Counties can reach out to the state intermediaries of respective home visiting programs for more information: Federal Funding Sources: Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) program, Medicaid, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). Stimulus dollars for the MIECHV program will be available to existing MIECHV sites. State Funding Sources: General fund with line item for specific models; Tobacco or similar taxes dedicated to early childhood support; TGYS; and, Colorado Child Abuse Prevention Trust Fund. Local Funding Sources: County Core dollars, local taxes Private Philanthropy Note: The Home Visiting Investment Task Force began meeting in November 2020 to develop a strategy to scale a continuum of home visiting services in Colorado. After the initial phase of work, the group has been reauthorized to continue with implementation around the Task Force Recommendations and Home Visiting Plan. For more information, please reference the group’s reauthorized charter, membership, and meeting details. Title II of the Federal Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA): Community Based Child Abuse Prevention (CBCAP) Funding in Colorado is currently being used to support cohorts of local communities in creating local child maltreatment prevention plans that align with the Colorado Child Maltreatment Prevention Framework for Action. A request for interest for the next cohort of planning sites is anticipated to be released in late 2021. A request for proposals for implementation funding will be released in late 2022 with funding to start in October 2023. Reach out to Essie Santillano (esmeralda.santillano@state.co.us) for more information.  Colorado Community Response (CCR) is a voluntary prevention program working with families that have been screened out or assessed and closed without child welfare services. The program was developed around the Strengthening Families Protective Factors Framework to strengthen families and prevent child maltreatment. Program components include strength-based case management, family-driven goal setting, education, and support to improve financial well-being, flex funding, and resource referrals to support goal attainment. The program is awarded through a competitive solicitation. Awards have been granted for the next five-year funding cycle (FFY 2022-2027), which began in July 2021. The next solicitation will be released in 2026. Reach out to Aaron Miller (aaronc.miller@state.co.us) for more information. SafeCare is a voluntary in-home behavioral parenting program that targets risk factors for maltreatment by teaching parents/caregivers skills in three topic areas: home safety, child health, and parent-child/parent-infant interaction. SafeCare targets parents/caregivers of children ages 0 to 5 who have a history of child maltreatment or who have risk factors that may lead to maltreatment. As of July 2021, SafeCare is available in 38 counties across Colorado and is supported by the Kempe Center as the state intermediary. SafeCare is funded by state general funds. Colorado’s Tony Grampsas Youth Services Program (TYGS): Funds are provided to community-based organizations that serve children, youth and their families with programs designed to reduce youth crime and violence, youth marijuana use and prevent child abuse and neglect and school dropout. Eligible TGYS applicants include local governments, schools, nonprofit organizations, state agencies and institutions of higher education. TGYS operates on a three-year grant cycle. The current grant cycle runs July 1, 2020 through June 30, 2023. Contact Kristi Griffith (kristi.griffith@state.co.us) for more information.  Behavioral Health: CDHS’s Office of Behavioral Health (OBH) has previously released solicitations for the High Risk Families Cash Fund to support capacity for and provide services to high-risk parents, including pregnant and parenting women, and for services for high-risk children and youth with behavioral health disorders. The Colorado Partnership for Thriving Families (CPTF) aims to significantly reduce child fatalities and child maltreatment for all children zero to five by positively and proactively supporting strong and healthy family formation. The partnership’s three main priorities are: 1) Systems Alignment: Align state and county human services, public health, and health care systems to place family well-being at the center. Focus on funding, data, and policy across systems; 2) Early Touch Points: Strengthen the well-being system service array to improve outcomes for parents and infants throughout pregnancy and the first year of life; and 3) Community Norms: Change community norms related to social connectedness to increase access to information on child development and informal support with parenting with the intent to reduce parental stress and decrease child maltreatment. Counties can engage via three levels--participate, magnify and/or demonstrate--on any or all priority areas. Demonstration sites receive technical support and may be eligible to receive funding for projects. This resource for county directors provides specific examples of ways to engage w/ CPTF and what the Partnership offers, as well as current demonstration site projects and upcoming opportunities. Email Krishna Dahya (kdahya@illuminatecolorado.org) for more information about engaging in the Partnership. Private Philanthropy Local CYDC Funding: The Colorado Youth Detention Continuum (CYDC) is implemented locally within each of the state’s 22 judicial districts. The Colorado General Assembly appropriates funds for CYDC programming and the Statewide Advisory Board is responsible for developing an allocation formula and allocating the funds. Jurisdictions use their allocations for a variety of purposes, including in some cases, providing treatment services to prevent or shorten out-of-home placement and further penetration into the system. Each local CYDC program has a Juvenile Services Planning Committee (JSPC) and a local coordinator to oversee implementation of local CYDC services.

Counties will continue to use their Child Welfare Block, Core, Collaborative Management Program and other funding sources such as Promoting Safe and Stable Families grants, as well as partner with prevention partners and local providers, to provide a continuum of prevention services that best meet the needs of families in their communities. [see:“What funding opportunities are available to help build a continuum of prevention programs in your area?”]

Family First requires that states ensure that, “consistent with the agency’s five-year title IV-E prevention plan, section 471(e)(4)(B) of the Social Security Act requires the title IV-E agency [CDHS] to provide services or programs to or on behalf of a child under an organizational structure and treatment framework that involves understanding, recognizing, and responding to the effects of all types of trauma and in accordance with recognized principles of a trauma-informed approach and trauma-specific interventions to address trauma’s consequences and facilitate healing.”

Primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention services can be expensive to build and sustain. Partnerships with your behavioral health, public health, home visiting, juvenile justice, collaborative management program, and others in your county and/or region will be key.  Reach out to and start a conversation with your local providers and state partners at CDHS that oversee respective prevention programs.More information is also available in a recorded lunch and learn session, “Funding to Support Prevention Services and Cross-System Financing Strategies,” hosted in partnership by CDHS and CHSDA:  Session Recording and Powerpoint. Counties will continue to use their Child Welfare Block, Core Services Program, Collaborative Management Program and other funding sources, to provide a continuum of prevention services that best meet the needs of families in their communities.  Federal Family First Transition Act Funds: The Family First Transition Act provides critical funding and flexibility to ensure a smooth and successful roll-out of Family First in Colorado. CDHS received over $7.7 Million in transition funding to spend flexibly on implementation efforts. Due to the overwhelming interest from stakeholders regarding the use of transition funds, the Department created a diverse 15-member group, 6 of whom represent county human service departments, in July 2020. The group is charged with reviewing and prioritizing funding proposals and developing recommendations for the Department. Funding opportunities on the prevention services side include: From 2020-2023, CDHS will be awarding up to $1.5 million ($500,000 each calendar year) for efforts that align with 1) Expanding the prevention services continuum in a way that addresses locally identified needs, meets Family First requirements, addresses inequities across the state, and emphasizes cultural responsiveness, and/or 2) Addresses known and potential barriers to Family First implementation. CDHS selected awards for the second round of Family First transition fund grants to support local Family First implementation activities in September 2021.More information about the recipients of awards  is also available: first round awardees; second round awardees. Federal Title IV-E Prevention in the Colorado Child Abuse Prevention Trust Fund: The new federal reimbursement that Colorado receives on Title IV-E prevention services will be deposited into the Colorado Child Abuse Prevention Trust Fund and distributed via an RFP process for purposes of building and expanding programs and services identified in the federal clearinghouse or under evaluation for purposes of petitioning the federal government for inclusion in the clearinghouse. Note: A separate fund is available within the Trust Fund for mini-grants for training on child sexual abuse prevention and training on strengthening protective factors. Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF):  Individual county allocations are derived from Colorado’s county block grant using a formula based on economic and demographic factors. TANF funds beyond basic cash assistance are designed to be flexible and can be used for a wide array of services and supports. County departments of human/social services have flexibility in determining the most effective approach for accomplishing the four federal purposes of TANF within their local area and within the parameters established by the state and federal government (Broad-based eligibility: lawfully present, income under $75,000, and a child in the home). Counties in many cases can use their TANF allocations and local reserves for prevention programs. Title IV-B Promoting Safe and Stable Families: SSF funds are awarded via an RFP process for purposes of providing family support services, family preservation services, reunification services, and adoption support services. PSSF awards include a match requirement for 30% of all awarded funds. Awards have been granted for the next five-year funding cycle (FFY 2022-2027), which begins October 2021. The next solicitation will be released 2026. Eligible applicants for a PSSF solicitation include County Departments of Social/Human Services, local Government agencies, and any private or not-for-profit community-based organization. Entities that are not a county department of human services will require a letter of support for the county departments of human services in the counties where they will be offering services. 2021 Stimulus funding: Colorado received an additional $847,869 in stimulus funds for PSSF as a part of COVID relief. This one-year funding is likely to support the first cohort of Child First sites. Reach out to Jill Jordan (jill.jordan2@state.co.us) for more information. Medicaid: Coordination with your Regional Accountable Entity (RAE) and Medicaid will be vital. When considering where Medicaid may be able to pay first before other funding streams for Family First prevention services, a good place to start is with a conversation with the RAE and county at the table together. Counties can also reach out to local providers directly. There is also a group working on the claiming logistics in seeking to address Medicaid as the “Payer of first resort.” You can reach out to Brad Borges (bradly.borges@state.co.us), Ann Bartholomew (ann.bartholomew@state.co.us), and Kelly Sawka (kelly.sawka@state.co.us) for more information.  Home Visiting: Historically, home visiting programs in Colorado have used a myriad of funding sources to build and sustain services. Colorado uses a combination of the following funding sources to fund different home visiting programs. Counties can reach out to the state intermediaries of respective home visiting programs for more information: Federal Funding Sources: Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) program, Medicaid, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). Stimulus dollars for the MIECHV program will be available to existing MIECHV sites. State Funding Sources: General fund with line item for specific models; Tobacco or similar taxes dedicated to early childhood support; TGYS; and, Colorado Child Abuse Prevention Trust Fund. Local Funding Sources: County Core dollars, local taxes Private Philanthropy Note: The Home Visiting Investment Task Force began meeting in November 2020 to develop a strategy to scale a continuum of home visiting services in Colorado. After the initial phase of work, the group has been reauthorized to continue with implementation around the Task Force Recommendations and Home Visiting Plan. For more information, please reference the group’s reauthorized charter, membership, and meeting details. Title II of the Federal Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA): Community Based Child Abuse Prevention (CBCAP) Funding in Colorado is currently being used to support cohorts of local communities in creating local child maltreatment prevention plans that align with the Colorado Child Maltreatment Prevention Framework for Action. A request for interest for the next cohort of planning sites is anticipated to be released in late 2021. A request for proposals for implementation funding will be released in late 2022 with funding to start in October 2023. Reach out to Essie Santillano (esmeralda.santillano@state.co.us) for more information.  Colorado Community Response (CCR) is a voluntary prevention program working with families that have been screened out or assessed and closed without child welfare services. The program was developed around the Strengthening Families Protective Factors Framework to strengthen families and prevent child maltreatment. Program components include strength-based case management, family-driven goal setting, education, and support to improve financial well-being, flex funding, and resource referrals to support goal attainment. The program is awarded through a competitive solicitation. Awards have been granted for the next five-year funding cycle (FFY 2022-2027), which began in July 2021. The next solicitation will be released in 2026. Reach out to Aaron Miller (aaronc.miller@state.co.us) for more information. SafeCare is a voluntary in-home behavioral parenting program that targets risk factors for maltreatment by teaching parents/caregivers skills in three topic areas: home safety, child health, and parent-child/parent-infant interaction. SafeCare targets parents/caregivers of children ages 0 to 5 who have a history of child maltreatment or who have risk factors that may lead to maltreatment. As of July 2021, SafeCare is available in 38 counties across Colorado and is supported by the Kempe Center as the state intermediary. SafeCare is funded by state general funds. Colorado’s Tony Grampsas Youth Services Program (TYGS): Funds are provided to community-based organizations that serve children, youth and their families with programs designed to reduce youth crime and violence, youth marijuana use and prevent child abuse and neglect and school dropout. Eligible TGYS applicants include local governments, schools, nonprofit organizations, state agencies and institutions of higher education. TGYS operates on a three-year grant cycle. The current grant cycle runs July 1, 2020 through June 30, 2023. Contact Kristi Griffith (kristi.griffith@state.co.us) for more information.  Behavioral Health: CDHS’s Office of Behavioral Health (OBH) has previously released solicitations for the High Risk Families Cash Fund to support capacity for and provide services to high-risk parents, including pregnant and parenting women, and for services for high-risk children and youth with behavioral health disorders. The Colorado Partnership for Thriving Families (CPTF) aims to significantly reduce child fatalities and child maltreatment for all children zero to five by positively and proactively supporting strong and healthy family formation. The partnership’s three main priorities are: 1) Systems Alignment: Align state and county human services, public health, and health care systems to place family well-being at the center. Focus on funding, data, and policy across systems; 2) Early Touch Points: Strengthen the well-being system service array to improve outcomes for parents and infants throughout pregnancy and the first year of life; and 3) Community Norms: Change community norms related to social connectedness to increase access to information on child development and informal support with parenting with the intent to reduce parental stress and decrease child maltreatment. Counties can engage via three levels--participate, magnify and/or demonstrate--on any or all priority areas. Demonstration sites receive technical support and may be eligible to receive funding for projects. This resource for county directors provides specific examples of ways to engage w/ CPTF and what the Partnership offers, as well as current demonstration site projects and upcoming opportunities. Email Krishna Dahya (kdahya@illuminatecolorado.org) for more information about engaging in the Partnership. Private Philanthropy Local CYDC Funding: The Colorado Youth Detention Continuum (CYDC) is implemented locally within each of the state’s 22 judicial districts. The Colorado General Assembly appropriates funds for CYDC programming and the Statewide Advisory Board is responsible for developing an allocation formula and allocating the funds. Jurisdictions use their allocations for a variety of purposes, including in some cases, providing treatment services to prevent or shorten out-of-home placement and further penetration into the system. Each local CYDC program has a Juvenile Services Planning Committee (JSPC) and a local coordinator to oversee implementation of local CYDC services.

Program eligibility requirements:o Mental health services, substance use services, or parenting skillso Evidence-based & trauma-informed

Family First Prevention Services Act:Judicial and Legal Practice ConsiderationsBefore a Petition is Filed: Prevention ServicesSeptember 1, 2021

Children’s Bureau leadership has noted court’s important role inprevention efforts:o“[J]udges and attorneys play absolutely critical roles inprevention in and out of the courtroom”; andoEnhanced attention to reasonable efforts will have a “rippleeffect across the justice system. Prevention is the work of thecourts.” - Jerry Milner, Former Assoc. Comm., Children’s Bureau, HHS

Transition Act funding available

If you are appointed after a petition for removal is filed, advocate forprevention services for the parent, kinship caregiver, or child to be offered asan alternative to removal

What new support does Family First provide to help reunify children with theirfamilies?Family First eliminates, as of October 1, 2018, the current 15-month time limit on the use ofTitle IV-B funds for family reunification services for children in foster care. However, it alsoclarifies that a child returning home also will now have access to 15 months of familyreunification. Accordingly, the law also changes the name of the program from “Time-LimitedFamily Reunification Services” to “Family Reunification Services.” [

26-5.3-104. Emergency assistance for families with children at imminent risk of being placed out of the home.(1) The executive director of the state department is hereby authorized to include in the state temporary assistance for needy families plan the establishment and implementation of an emergency assistance program for families with children at imminent risk of being placed out of the home. The purpose of the program shall be to meet the needs of the family in crisis due to the imminent risk of out-of-home placement by providing emergency assistance in the form of intake, assessment, counseling, treatment, and other family preservation services that meet the needs of the family which are attributable to the emergency or crisis situation.

The law also created a task force to help ensure alignment of state policies with the federal 2018 Family First Prevention Services Act (including how to incentivize certain services/placements), among other duties. I