A three-stage progressive training strategy -- large-scale pre-training, hard sample fine-tuning, and GRPO alignment -- sequentially exploits these data at different quality tiers.

using the best availablescience, to maximize physical and psychological safety, facilitate the recovery of thechild and family, and support their ability to thrive.”

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.

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

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

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

placement provides the most effective level of care

Counties will continue to use Child Welfare Block, Core and County-onlyfunding to provide services that best meet the needs of theircommunities

FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS FORPREVENTION SERVICES

COLORADO IMPLEMENTATIONCORE VALUES

FEDERAL PREVENTION SERVICESTO KEEP FAMILIES TOGETHER

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.

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)?

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.

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

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

The other way to help these students would be to dramatically reduce the price or time required to get an education of acceptable quality (and for acceptable read “enabling the student to get a better job”, their commonest goal.) This is a worse option in every respect except one, which is that it may be possible.