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

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.

CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT USER MANUAL SERIES

interventions should be selected based on the needs of the family and the availability of strategies and interventions wi

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

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).

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)

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

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

preventionservices that are evidence-based

FAMILY FIRST 101

Expanded educational options such as Career and Technical Education (CTE) and enrollment in two-year and four-year institutions should be easily accessible to current and former foster youth. The committee recommends waiving tuition and fees for former foster youth who enroll in in-state postsecondary education and apply for the tuition waiver by age 30

#1 Waive tuition and fees for Colorado state colleges, universities, and technical schools for current and former foster youth up to age 30

All current and former foster youth will have access to the post-secondary education and training they need to succeed in their chosen career path

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

2022 ANNUAL PROGRESS AND SERVICES REPORT2020-2024 CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES PLAN

ARD’s qualitative case review instrument has items and response sets designed to measure the quality of case practice in the following areas: ●Mental health ●Substance abuse ●Educational stability and progress ●Frequency and quality of contacts with the child/youth and parents ●Engagement of the child/youth and parents in case planning ●Adequacy of visitation between the child/youth and their siblings and parents ●Timeliness of Title IV-E eligibility

“Hard Services”: the purchase of services or distribution of cash payments for the following:- housing funds, including rent, repairs, utilities, or rent deposits- food or money for food- clothing- transportation to include fares, auto repair, auto fuel, auto insurance or bus pass- uncovered medical or dental expenses- appliances, furniture- emergency shelter- employment related expenses, such as tools or dues

County departments must make all of the Core services, except for county designed services, available toany client who meets the criteria for the service

D&N cases should proceed. They emphasize a concept that you will hearoften during the day – that word is “frontloading.” What it means is thatfrom the moment a family enters the court system the court should ensure thatevery available resource and court practice is used to view the case throughthe eyes of the child, to understand that the child cannot wait, to understandthat the time between court hearings can be an eternity to a child, to knowthat children are not resilient

Federal Funding In 2018 the United Stated Department of Health and Human Services, Children’s Bureau, has interpreted administrative costs for foster care to include costs for children’s and parents’ attorneys. (Child Welfare Policy Manual, Section 8.1B, Question 30). For the first time, jurisdictions can seek federal reimbursement for the cost of legal representation for eligible children and their parents.  The resources listed below provide information about claiming federal Title IV-E Funds of the Social Security Act to pay for legal representation for children and parents.

Court Improvement ProgramOffice of The Colorado State Court Administrator

National Association of Counsel for Children

Core Services Program goals Focus on family strengths by directing intensive services that support and strengthen the family and/or protect the child/youth Prevent out-of-home placement of the child/youth Return children/youth in placement to their own home or unite children/youth with their permanent families Provide services that protect the child/youth

recognition that children/youth need a safe and stable family and that separating children/youth from their families and communities removes them from natural supports and often causes trauma, leaving lasting negative effects.

Programs should be based on well-articulated theories.

Programs should have a primary focus on a population served by the child welfare agency.

however, in describing the models on which their program is based, administrators tend to focus on service delivery characteristics (most notably caseload size and service duration) rather than on the theoretical underpinnings of the service delivery model.

service programs designed to provide follow-up care to families to whom a child has been returned

In 1993, Congress passed legislation establishing title IV, part B-2 of the Social Security Act, creating funding for family preservation and family support programs.

"Front loading" D&N cases (early identification, notification and involvement of parents andinterested family members in the D&N process, early assessment, and early development ofmeaningful treatment plans)

Timing. The Adjudicatory hearing will be held within 30 days of the filing of theD&N. If the matter is contested, every effort will be made to set the Adjudicatory trialwithin 45 days of the filing of the D&N petition in a removal case and 60 days in anon-emergent case. The court encourages parties to participate in a Family GroupDecision Making or mediation session prior to this hearing or trial and all futurehearings or trials, whenever appropriate.

What research shows:A landmark May 2019 study17 foundproviding parents multidisciplinaryrepresentation in child welfareproceedings significantly improvedcase outcomes. The multiyear studyin New York City compared out-comes for 9,582 families and their18,288 children, looking at differ-ences based on representation type:solo panel attorneys vs. multidis-ciplinary legal teams that includedattorneys, social workers, and parentadvocates. The study found multi-disciplinary representation promot-ed swift permanency outcomes by:■ reducing the time childrenspend in care,■ producing plans that allowedparents to safely care for theirchildren,■ reuniting families sooner, and■ increasing kin placements andguardianships.

Inappropriate Diagnosis Protocols (Sec. 50743)

Attorney Rolesƒ Will agency counsel work with caseworkers and otheragency staff to ensure procedures are followed?

Who will be responsible for ensuring diagnoses for chil-dren and youth in care align with the state protocol?

Where can states seek assistance from other health orsocial services providers to develop protocols

In cases where prevention services have not been provided:ƒ At a preliminary protective or shelter care hearing, canjudges ask if prevention services could be provided in-stead of removal?ƒ Will the court require the agency to report why pre-vention services were not pursued in cases that in-volve mental health, substance use, and parent skillchallenges?ƒ How will courts evaluate the lack of prevention servicesin relationship to findings that the agency provided rea-sonable efforts to prevent removal as required by federallaw?

there are two significant ways in whichprevention services can impact judicial decision making: (1)in cases where prevention services were provided but wereunsuccessful and the agency later files a petition to placethe child in foster care; and (2) in cases where the agencyfiles a petition to place the child in foster care without firstattempting to provide prevention services.

Specialty: Qualified Residential Treatment Program (QRTP)Specialty Code: 689 Enrollment Type: Facility Each service location must complete a separate application. A QRTP cannot be enrolled as a Residential Child Care Facility (RCCF-provider type 52) at the same time. Required Attachments: Department of Human Services, Office of Early Childhood, Division of Early Care and Learning, Time Limited Child Care License indicating Service Type as: Qualified Residential Treatment Program. Accreditation by the Joint Commission, the Commission on Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities, or Council on Accreditation of Services for Families and Children. Attestation Form for Facilities Enrolling with Health First Colorado (RCCF & QRTP), which can be found on the Provider Forms web page under the Provider Enrollment & Update Forms drop-down, must be completed and attached for in state only. W9 (signed and dated within the last 6 months). Voided business check (no temporary checks or deposit slips) or bank letter (dated within the last 6 months). Malpractice/Liability insurance information must be entered in the application; however, proof of insurance is not a required attachment.

Teenagers often make choices while failing to consider the possible consequences of their actions

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

Contractually, ASOs are required to provide independent assessments in a timely manner.

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.

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

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

So what is a “District Plan”? Just like the roadmap of DHS procedures, it isthe document that summarizes the policies and procedures that the variousdistricts use in processing D&N cases. Most districts have formulated theirdistrict plan as required by Chief Justice Directive 98-02 (Handout 1bb). Forthe most part these plans are not written in legalese and are recipes for how

What is a “District Plan”?Your plan can be found at:http://www.courts.state.co.us/Courts/Supreme_Court/Committees/Committee.cfm/Committee_ID/8Resource Guidelines: Improving Court Practice in Child Abuse &Neglect Cases

DATE: May 28, 1999 ChiefDistrict Judge REVISED: February 7, 2011

Family First designates Colorado’s Court Improvement Program (CIP) to train judicial officers and legal professionals on key provisions of this legislation. In Colorado, CIP has and will continue to collaborate with the following stakeholders to help increase understanding of the significant changes brought about by the passage of Family First Colorado Department of Human Services Office of Respondent Parents’ Counsel Office of the Child’s Representative County Attorneys’ Association County Human Services Directors Association The Juvenile Justice Community Local Best Practice Court Teams Training by all of the above named partners will help to ensure that Colorado’s children, youth, and families have a more positive experience in the child welfare system.

As a result of this assessment/evaluation, the caseworker and family shall identify thefamily's current safety, risk and needs, to include level of functioning, areas of strengthsand weaknesses, specific problems to be addressed, and changes that must occur toremedy the problems that brought the family to the agency. The following informationshall be included in the assessment documented in the Family Services Plan:

7.301.21 Family Services Plan Timing Requirements [Eff. 09/01/2007]The Family Service Plan document must be completed:A. Within sixty (60) calendar days of opening an assessment in the automated case managementsystem for children in their own homes, including Core Services program cases in which thechildren are not in out-of-home placement. There may be one Family Services Plan for the familyin these cases.

7.303.15 Service Time FramesA. Services may be provided for up to eighteen (18) months

“Diagnostic and Treatment Planning Services”: various evaluations of the child and family tofacilitate the development of the Family Services Plan and the move of the child to a permanentplacement.

Core Services Programs may include any of the following elements of service:

D&N District Plans District Plans District Plans for Handling Dependency and Neglect Cases

Family preservation is the foundation The Core Services Program is based on a foundation of research and practice in family preservation. Family preservation services are generally short-term, family-based services designed to support families in crisis by improving parenting and family functioning while keeping children/youth safe.

Family preservation services There are 10 designated types of family preservation services, listed below, and this array of services constitutes the Core Services Program. Aftercare Services: Any of the Core Services provided to prepare a child for reunification with his/her family or other permanent placement and to prevent future out-of-home placement of the child. County Designed Services: An optional service tailored by the specific county in meeting the needs of families and children in the community in order to prevent the out-of-home placement of children or facilitate reunification or another form of permanence. County designed services encompass components of the menu of Core Services, yet are structured in their delivery and tracked uniquely to gain detailed data on evidenced-based programs, as well as programs that are providing positive outcomes in communities around the state. Day Treatment: Comprehensive, highly structured services that provide education to children and therapy to children and their families. Home-Based Intervention: Services provided primarily in the home of the client and include a variety of services, which can include therapeutic services, concrete services, collateral services and crisis intervention directed to meet the needs of the child and family. See Section 7.303.14 for service elements of therapeutic, concrete, collateral, and crisis intervention. Intensive Family Therapy: Therapeutic intervention typically with all family members to improve family communication, functioning, and relationships. Life Skills: Services provided primarily in the home that teach household management, effectively accessing community resources, parenting techniques, and family conflict management. Mental Health Services: Diagnostic and/or therapeutic services to assist in the development of the family services plan and to assess and/or improve family communication, functioning, and relationships. Sexual Abuse Treatment: Therapeutic intervention designed to address issues and behaviors related to sexual abuse victimization, sexual dysfunction, sexual abuse perpetration, and to prevent further sexual abuse and victimization. Special Economic Assistance: Emergency financial assistance of not more than $2,000 per family per year in the form of cash and/or vendor payment to purchase hard services. See Section 7.303.14 for service elements of hard services. Substance Abuse Treatment Services: Diagnostic and/or therapeutic services to assist in the development of the family service plan, to assess and/or improve family communication, functioning and relationships, and to prevent further abuse of drugs or alcohol.

developed, in part, as a response to a federal requirement to demonstrate reasonable efforts

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)?

return to families from which they have been removed

Family Preservation Services -- services for children and families designed to help families (including adoptive and extended families) at risk or in crisis, including:

services designed to improve parenting skills (by reinforcing parents' confidence in their strengths, and helping them to identify where improvement is needed and to obtain assistance in improving those skills) with respect to matters such as child development, family budgeting, coping with stress, health and nutrition.

preplacement prevention services programs, such as intensive family preservation programs, designed to help children at risk of foster care placement remain with their families;

Criterion #2: Programs should be based on well-articulated theories

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:

$100 million for Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) State grants to improve the child protective services system of each state.

ARP created a new $1 billion Pandemic Emergency Assistance Fund for grant recipients operating a Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program in order to provide immediate economic relief to families with the lowest incomes who are unable to meet their added expenses or debt due to the COVID-19 pandemic.  ARP provides grantees with the flexibility to extend eligibility to a broader group of families in need and not limit eligibility to traditional TANF recipients.

ARP aims to address systemic inequities by cutting child poverty in half and funding essential services such as child care, Head Start, preventative child welfare interventions, family violence prevention, energy assistance, and short-term pandemic emergency assistance, and it is a bold step forward in the fight for our children’s future.

$100 million for Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) State grants to improve the child protective services system of each state.

Thus, a state, tribe, or territory may use the standards it has developed for needy families to receive TANF-funded NRST benefits or may opt to set a different standard for PEAF-funded NRST benefits that better suits the pandemic situation in its service area.  Because PEAF is not TANF assistance (as defined in the regulations at 45 CFR 260.31 and 45 CFR § 286.10) the TANF assistance requirements and prohibitions do not automatically apply.  The grantee may decide to align the benefit with TANF, but does not have to align them.  Depending on the eligibility criteria that the grantee establishes for PEAF-funded NRST benefits, it may provide benefits to families not otherwise eligible for TANF assistance, including: Families that have been sanctioned under TANF Families that have reached the federal or other time limit on receiving  TANF Families with more income or assets than the standard for TANF, but who are currently in need Families that have reached a TANF NRST benefit lifetime or annual limit

Thus, a state, tribe, or territory may use the standards it has developed for needy families to receive TANF-funded NRST benefits or may opt to set a different standard for PEAF-funded NRST benefits that better suits the pandemic situation in its service area.  Because PEAF is not TANF assistance (as defined in the regulations at 45 CFR 260.31 and 45 CFR § 286.10) the TANF assistance requirements and prohibitions do not automatically apply.  The grantee may decide to align the benefit with TANF, but does not have to align them.  Depending on the eligibility criteria that the grantee establishes for PEAF-funded NRST benefits, it may provide benefits to families not otherwise eligible for TANF assistance, including: Families that have been sanctioned under TANF Families that have reached the federal or other time limit on receiving  TANF Families with more income or assets than the standard for TANF, but who are currently in need Families that have reached a TANF NRST benefit lifetime or annual limit

RationaleAs evidence-based research becomes the norm in child welfare practice, countiesare more interested than ever in evaluating the effectiveness of services and placementsprovided to children and families in the system.

Formally referred to as family preservation services (FPS), the Colorado CoreServices Program is based on “assistance that focuses on family strengths and includesservices that empower a family by providing alternative problem-solving techniques,child-rearing practices, and responses to living situations creating stress for the family”(C.R.S. 26-5.5-103). The Core Services Program also includes the provision of resources(e.g., special economic assistance) to serve as support systems for children and families.

RationaleAs evidence-based research becomes the norm in child welfare practice, countiesare more interested than ever in evaluating the effectiveness of services and placementsprovided to children and families in the system.

erefore, toassist states in providing services designed to support families and helpkeep them together, the Congress enacted legislation as part of theOmnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 ( OBRA 1993) that authorized$930 million in federal funds to states over a 5-year period for familypreservation and support (FPS) services. Family preservation servicestypically target families already in crisis whose children would otherwisebe removed from home. Family support services are community-basedactivities intended to prevent the kinds of crises that family preservationservices are aimed at alleviating. To receive federal funds for theseservices, each state had to submit a grant application in 1994 and a 5-yearplan in 1995 that set quantifiable goals and methods for measuringoutcomes

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.

Mission Statement The mission of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges is to provide all judges, courts, and related agencies involved with juvenile, family, and domestic violence cases with the knowledge and skills to improve the lives of the families and children who seek justice.

Mission Statement The mission of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges is to provide all judges, courts, and related agencies involved with juvenile, family, and domestic violence cases with the knowledge and skills to improve the lives of the families and children who seek justice.

Is there a way for legal organizations in a given locality to access this funding in the eventthe local IV-E agency decides not to seek federal funds for representation for children andparents?o No. Funds must be claimed through the state IV-E agency. If you are an individualattorney or attorney organization interested in learning if your jurisdiction isplanning to take advantage of this funding opportunity, your best first step is tocontact your state court improvement program (CIP).

Will jurisdictions have to redirect IV-E funds from current programs or give up somethingto support legal representation for parents and children?o No. Title IV-E funds are an open-ended entitlement. The federal policy changemeans that new/additional IV-E dollars are now available to support high-qualitylegal representation for children and parents.

he Children’sBureau has been clear that their preference is that newly available federal fundssupport improved representation for parents and children – not act as a substitutefor state investment. The new federal funds should be used to invest in improvedrepresentation

Generally, representing parents and children in child welfareproceedings requires that attorneys are competent in the relevant laws andlitigation skills

Can jurisdictions submit a claim for federal reimbursement for costs for non-attorneymembers of an interdisciplinary legal representation team for children and parents?o Yes. The Child Welfare Policy Manual clarifies that the Title IV-E agency may claimadministrative costs for the parent and/or child legal representation team, includingparalegals, investigators, peer partners or social workers that support attorneysproviding independent legal representation for children who are candidates for titleIV-E foster care or are in title IV-E foster care, and their parents, to prepare for andparticipate in all stages of foster care legal proceedings, and for office support staffand overhead expenses. See Child Welfare Policy Manual, Section 8.1B, Question 32

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.

There is not a Program Instruction requiring jurisdictions to amend their IV-E plansto include legal representation for children and parents. However, jurisdictionsseeking to draw down federal IV-E funds to support legal representation for parentsand children must include it in their budget allocation plans.o Our understanding is that the Children’s Bureau highly encourages jurisdictionsseeking to draw down federal funds for legal representation for children and parentsto include it in their Child and Family Service Plans since that plan serves as theblueprint for ensuring children’s safety, permanency, and well-being.

he Children’sBureau has been clear that their preference is that newly available federal fundssupport improved representation for parents and children – not act as a substitutefor state investment. The new federal funds should be used to invest in improvedrepresentation

Will jurisdictions have to redirect IV-E funds from current programs or give up somethingto support legal representation for parents and children?o No. Title IV-E funds are an open-ended entitlement. The federal policy changemeans that new/additional IV-E dollars are now available to support high-qualitylegal representation for children and parents.

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.

Can jurisdictions submit a claim for federal reimbursement for costs for non-attorneymembers of an interdisciplinary legal representation team for children and parents?o Yes. The Child Welfare Policy Manual clarifies that the Title IV-E agency may claimadministrative costs for the parent and/or child legal representation team, includingparalegals, investigators, peer partners or social workers that support attorneysproviding independent legal representation for children who are candidates for titleIV-E foster care or are in title IV-E foster care, and their parents, to prepare for andparticipate in all stages of foster care legal proceedings, and for office support staffand overhead expenses. See Child Welfare Policy Manual, Section 8.1B, Question 32

There is not a Program Instruction requiring jurisdictions to amend their IV-E plansto include legal representation for children and parents. However, jurisdictionsseeking to draw down federal IV-E funds to support legal representation for parentsand children must include it in their budget allocation plans.o Our understanding is that the Children’s Bureau highly encourages jurisdictionsseeking to draw down federal funds for legal representation for children and parentsto include it in their Child and Family Service Plans since that plan serves as theblueprint for ensuring children’s safety, permanency, and well-being.

What funding is available to support legal representation forparents and children?A recent federal policy change provides a new funding source for legalrepresentation for parents and children.9 The change allows states to seekfederal reimbursement under Title IV-E of the Social Security Act for thecost of providing legal representation to eligible children and parents. Thepurpose of the funding is to invest in improving legal representation forchildren and parents.10Excellent resources exist explaining the details of this new funding.11Becoming knowledgeable about this funding source, raising awarenesswithin the child welfare legal community, and supporting efforts to lever-age it to improve representation quality in your jurisdiction are key judi-cial roles. However, elements of high-quality legal representation do notdepend on new funding sources, so it is equally key to ensure attorneysadhere to fundamental representation standards that guide their practice.1

Building a Multidisciplinary Legal Team: The role of social workers and peermentors in representing parents and children could be eligible for reimbursement whena multidisciplinary team addresses prevention. Funding is available for time-limitedprevention services for mental health, substance abuse disorder, and in-home parentskill-based programs for children or youth who are candidates for foster care

Pre-Petition Legal Advocacy: Funding is available to reimburse expenses forattorneys, paralegals, social workers, peer partners, investigators, support staff, andoverhead for independent child and parent legal representation prior to the filing of adependency petition

Pre-Petition Legal Advocacy: Funding is available to reimburse expenses forattorneys, paralegals, social workers, peer partners, investigators, support staff, andoverhead for independent child and parent legal representation prior to the filing of adependency petition

Building a Multidisciplinary Legal Team: The role of social workers and peermentors in representing parents and children could be eligible for reimbursement whena multidisciplinary team addresses prevention. Funding is available for time-limitedprevention services for mental health, substance abuse disorder, and in-home parentskill-based programs for children or youth who are candidates for foster care

We now are thrilled to report on remarkable developments which should focus the field on the importance and ability of providing high-quality legal representation to parents in dependency cases. We have long believed two things about parental representation in child welfare cases:

Until now, we could rely only on personal experiences and anecdotes. No longer. In May 2019, a study commissioned by Casey Family Programs and jointly investigated by Casey, New York University, and Action Research was published validating this belief.[2]

Despite its importance in terms of the consequences poor parents and children suffer from coercive intervention in their families, the field has been undervalued for far too long.

key findings are: Reduced time in care: Multidisciplinary representation reduced children’s time in foster care by nearly 4 fewer months during the 48 months following the petition filing, through faster early reunification outcomes, compared to panel representation. This amounts to up to nearly $40 million annual savings in foster care board rates for New York City. Child safety: Children were just as safe with multidisciplinary representation. Representation type did not impact whether children experienced a subsequent substantiated report of child maltreatment during the 24 months following the petition filing. First-Year Reunifications: Giving parents the right kind of legal team means families are reunited significantly sooner than would otherwise happen. The multidisciplinary family defense offices secured the safe return of children to their families approximately 43% more often in the first year than the solo lawyers. Second-Year Reunifications: The multidisciplinary family defense offices secured the safe return of children to their families 25% more often in the second year. Higher Rates of Kin Placement: The family defense offices allowed children to be permanently released to relatives more than twice as often in the first year of a case and 67% more often in the second year. These families may otherwise have been permanently dissolved or the children may have spent their childhood separated from their family and aged out. First-Month Reunifications: 17 percent more children would be reunified within a month if their parents had multidisciplinary representation than if represented by panel lawyers. First Six-Month Reunifications: 27 percent more children would be reunified with their families within six months if their parents had multidisciplinary representation than if their parents had been assigned panel attorneys. Guardianships: Of those children who could not be returned to their families, 40% more children ended up with a permanent disposition of guardianships when their parents had multidisciplinary representation than children whose parents were represented by panel lawyers.

Giving parents free representation by lawyers does more than advance social justice. It is a smart investment because it furthers the state’s goal of reducing the time children spend in foster care. The study showed

Despite its importance in terms of the consequences poor parents and children suffer from coercive intervention in their families, the field has been undervalued for far too long.

We are long past the time of regarding a parent’s lawyer as an antagonist to be tolerated only because the statute requires one. It’s now time to recognize parents’ lawyers and other members of the multidisciplinary legal team as allies to the system, committed to the identical values that drive it: Keep no child from his or her parents, for even one night, except when necessary to protect the child from a risk of serious harm.

Lawyering really matters and providing parents the right kind of legal representation in child welfare cases can mean the difference between preserving a family and seeing it permanently destroyed.

“A CASA is appointed by a judge to provide information directly to the judge—not to provide legal representation,” Milner said. “The policy specifically covers attorneys … and support staff that help prepare attorneys for the legal representation of a child or parent as part of an independent legal team.”

American Bar AssociationStandards of Practice for Attorneys RepresentingParents in Abuse and Neglect Cases

American Bar AssociationStandards of Practice for Attorneys RepresentingParents in Abuse and Neglect Cases

for children who have experiencedmaltreatment, out-of-home placement provides little to no measurable benefit in terms of cognitive or languageoutcomes, academic achievement, mental or behavioral health, or suicide risk

It is clear that the factor most closely associated with positive outcomes forchildren is meaningful, lifelong connections to their families.

Further, for children who have experienced maltreatment, out-of-home placement may cause additional harm byincreasing their risk of juvenile and adult criminal behavior, increased risk of Reactive Attachment Disorder, andincreased risk of early mortality

When a child is at risk of not being safe, this report fortifiesthe call for alternative interventions that strengthen ratherthan undermine the sense of feeling safe, which familyconnections provide

It is clear that the factor most closely associated with positive outcomes forchildren is meaningful, lifelong connections to their families.

Further, for children who have experienced maltreatment, out-of-home placement may cause additional harm byincreasing their risk of juvenile and adult criminal behavior, increased risk of Reactive Attachment Disorder, andincreased risk of early mortality

for children who have experiencedmaltreatment, out-of-home placement provides little to no measurable benefit in terms of cognitive or languageoutcomes, academic achievement, mental or behavioral health, or suicide risk

For decades child welfare systems have assessed risk ofphysical safety and made decisions based on the probabilityof physical harm (being safe), without fully considering theeffects psychological and emotional harm (feeling safe).

eelingsafe comes from the love and belonging children receive fromtheir families, and separation undermines this critical piece ofthe two-part safety equation

When a child is at risk of not being safe, this report fortifiesthe call for alternative interventions that strengthen ratherthan undermine the sense of feeling safe, which familyconnections provide

earn about funding options to pay for precourt legal advocacy andassociated cost-savings. Early legal advocacy programs tend to relyon several funding sources, including:■ federal funding under Title IV-E of and Title IV-B the SocialSecurity Act,■ state funding,■ private foundation grants,■ court improvement program funding,■ contracts with child welfare agencies or legal aid offices, and■ donations.

earn about funding options to pay for precourt legal advocacy andassociated cost-savings. Early legal advocacy programs tend to relyon several funding sources, including:■ federal funding under Title IV-E of and Title IV-B the SocialSecurity Act,■ state funding,■ private foundation grants,■ court improvement program funding,■ contracts with child welfare agencies or legal aid offices, and■ donations.

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.

Child Abuse & Neglect Litigation Helps attorneys and judges handle litigation in civil and criminal child abuse and neglect cases. Shares legal precedents, tactical concerns, and strategies. Attorneys and judges ONLY. Subscribe (Write "Join Child Abuse & Neglect listserv" in subject)

Parent Representation Provides parent attorneys across the country with a forum to share ideas on cases, tools, and strategies to improve practice. Members share challenges and successes. Subscribe (Write "Join Parent Representation listserv" in subject)

Child Abuse & Neglect Litigation Helps attorneys and judges handle litigation in civil and criminal child abuse and neglect cases. Shares legal precedents, tactical concerns, and strategies. Attorneys and judges ONLY. Subscribe (Write "Join Child Abuse & Neglect listserv" in subject)

months and a youth 13 or older is in care for 12 consecutive or 18 non-consecutive months.These ongoing oversight requirements exist to ensure that children are in a QRTP only as long asis necessary to meet their treatment needs. The level of acuity of care that a QRTP offers isdesigned to serve as an intensive and time-limited intervention, not a long-term placement.Evidence demonstrates that children fare best in families,

Is there no limit on QRTP placement length if the placement is continuallyassessed and confirmed by the court and approved by HHS at the appropriateintervals?While Family First does not create a hard deadline for moving children out of a QRTP

Title IV-E eligible children must receive an assessment within 30 days of placement in a QRTP.The Children’s Bureau has indicated that the 30-day timeline begins when a child enters aQRTP

If a child moves from one QRTP program to another, will a new 30-dayassessment/60-day court review be required?Yes. The assessment and court review process apply to each QRTP setting in which ajurisdiction places a child. [§475A(c)(1)(A); P.L. 115-123 §50742]

Family First requires a QRTP to provide discharge planning and family-based aftercare supportfor at least six months post-discharge.

How is the child’s family involved in assessment process?Family First requires that, as part of the assessment to determine whether a QRTP is anappropriate setting for a child, the Title IV-E agency work to convene a family and permanencyteam to provide input on the process of determining the most appropriate and least restrictiveenvironment for the child. The purpose of this team is to ensure that those adults closest to achild and who best know the child’s needs can share their perspectives as part of the process ofdetermining the most appropriate setting for the child. A family and permanency team mustconsist of all of a child’s appropriate birth family members, relatives, and other individuals whohave an emotionally significant relationship with the child but are unrelated by birth or marriage,known as fictive kin. The team must also include, as appropriate, professionals who are aresource to the child’s family, including teachers, medical or mental health providers who havetreated the child, or clergy. The team’s role is to provide input during the assessment process,particularly during the determination of whether a child’s needs can be met with family membersor in a foster family home, or if not, what type of non-family setting is appropriate to meet theirneeds. The team also helps to develop a list of child-specific short- and long-term mental andbehavioral health goals. To ensure the voice and perspective of youth is a part of this process, forchildren 14 and older, the team must include individuals that the young person selects from theirpermanency planning team as required by Sec. 475(5)(C)(iv). This youth engagement practicebuilds upon pre-existing policies in federal law that promote youth engagement (See Youthengagement in case plans - what Federal Law Requires). The qualified individual conducting theassessment will work with the family and permanency team when making the assessment.[§475A(c)(1)(B)(i); P.L. 115-123 §50742

What happens if a jurisdiction places a child in a QRTP, but the assessmentdetermines that is not an appropriate setting for them?Title IV-E FCMPs may continue for no longer than 30 days following a determination that theplacement is no longer recommended or approved for that child.

s Chafee the only source of funding for services to support the transition toadulthood for youth in foster care?No. Local, state and federal child welfare funds support all youth, including older youth, in thecare of the child welfare system. The obligation to provide services to prepare youth for thetransition to adulthood, beginning at least at age 14, is separate from the Chafee funding streamand applies to all youth in care. The obligation to support planning for the transition to adulthoodand provide transition services beginning at age 14 is part of the case planning and case reviewobligation in federal law. In addition, requirements around transition planning that must occurbefore youth age 18 or older discharge from the child welfare system apply to all youthregardless of the funding source for the services. Chafee funds are designated to fund services forvarious populations of older youth who are or were in the foster care system in making theirtransition to adulthood. Federal law notes that Chafee funds must supplement other funds thatStates and Tribes draw on to build a high-quality system of supports for older youth.[§475(1)(D)(“case plan”); §475(5)(C)(“case review”); §475(5)(H); §477(d)(2)]

Are there requirements that the Title IV-E agency document how it engaged thefamily in the assessment process?Family First requires that a child’s case plan include documentation on how to contact the familyand permanency team members, as well as evidence that the meetings are held at times andplaces convenient to the family. If a child’s assessment outcome is different than the wishes of

the family and permanency team, the case plan must also outline why the assessment does notrecommend those preferences. [§475A(c)(1)(B)(iii)(VII); P.L. 115-123 §50742]

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.” [

As part of the QRTP model, Family First creates a new process for ensuring that a Title IV-Eeligible child needs the level of treatment intervention that a QRTP offers. Within 30 days ofentering a QRTP, a child must receive an assessment from a qualified individual using anappropriate functional assessment tool to determine whether they need care in a QRTP andwhether that particular QRTP can meet their specific treatment needs. The purpose of thisprocess is to acknowledge that QRTPs are a treatment intervention, and that through the processof specialization, not every QRTP will be appropriate for each child’s specific needs

Effective training of assessment professionals in child development, childtrauma, and the types of particular QRTPs and how they meet the needs of individual childrenwill be essential to the effective implementation of this aspect of Family First.

What if our jurisdiction does not have anyone available who meets the qualifiedindividual criteria?There is a process for Title IV-E agencies to obtain from the HHS Secretary a waiver from therequirement that a qualified individual conduct the assessment. Title IV-E agencies must submitdocumentation to the HHS Secretary certifying that trained professionals or licensed cliniciansconducting these assessments shall maintain objectivity in determining the most effective andappropriate placement for a child. This certification process is required to prevent conflicts ofinterest in placing children in QRTPs

What organizations can accredit a QRTP?A QRTP can receive accreditation from the Joint Commission on Accreditation of HealthcareOrganizations, the Commission on Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities, or the Council onAccreditation. The HHS Secretary may also choose to approve other independent, not-for-profitaccrediting bodies. [§472(k)(4)(G); P.L. 115-123 §50741]

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

(66) “Foster care” means the placement of a child or youth into the legal custody or legal authority of a county department of human or social services for physical placement of the child or youth in a kinship care placement; supervised independent living placement, as defined in section 19-7-302; or certified or licensed facility, or the physical placement of a juvenile committed to the custody of the state department of human services into a community placement.

(66) “Foster care” means the placement of a child or youth into the legal custody or legal authority of a county department of human or social services for physical placement of the child or youth in a kinship care placement; supervised independent living placement, as defined in section 19-7-302; or certified or licensed facility, or the physical placement of a juvenile committed to the custody of the state department of human services into a community placement.

d) "QUALIFYING STUDENT" MEANS A RESIDENT OF COLORADO WHOHAS BEEN ACCEPTED FOR ENROLLMENT AT AN INSTITUTION OF HIGHEREDUCATION WHO:(I) HAS BEEN PLACED IN FOSTER CARE, AS DEFINED IN SECTION19-1-103, IN COLORADO AT ANY TIME ON OR AFTER THE STUDENT'STHIRTEENTH BIRTHDAY; OR

d) "QUALIFYING STUDENT" MEANS A RESIDENT OF COLORADO WHOHAS BEEN ACCEPTED FOR ENROLLMENT AT AN INSTITUTION OF HIGHEREDUCATION WHO:(I) HAS BEEN PLACED IN FOSTER CARE, AS DEFINED IN SECTION19-1-103, IN COLORADO AT ANY TIME ON OR AFTER THE STUDENT'STHIRTEENTH BIRTHDAY; OR

In 2022, legislators passed SB 22-008 which created a program to provide higher education tuition assistance to foster students.  FosterEd provides free tuition to current and former foster students at all of Colorado’s public colleges and universities.

In foster care from age 13+

In 2022, legislators passed SB 22-008 which created a program to provide higher education tuition assistance to foster students.  FosterEd provides free tuition to current and former foster students at all of Colorado’s public colleges and universities.

In foster care from age 13+

This program makes available vouchers of up to $5,000 per year per youth for post secondary education and training for eligible youth.

Office of Family Assistance An Office of the Administration for Children & Families

The American Rescue Plan (ARP) provides critical and unprecedented support to children, families, and communities in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and resulting economic downturn, which have been exacerbated by historic racial injustices.  As one of the largest stimulus packages in U.S. history, ARP endowed ACF with $47.5 billion in supplemental funding to further our mission and meet the needs of the children, families, and communities we serve now, as well as build a strong foundation for the next generation.

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.