Family Treatment Court Best Practice Standards: Laying the Groundwork Kirstin P. Frescoln, PhD, CPM, Senior Program Associate Brooke O’Byrne, MBA, CADC, Senior Program Associate Center for Children and Family Futures December 12, 2019 2:00-3:30 PM ET
Welcome and Housekeeping Melissa Stein, DrPH Senior Research Associate Criminal Justice Division Policy Research Associates, Inc. 2
Disclaimer The views, opinions, and content expressed in this presentation and discussion do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or policies of the Center for Mental Health Services (CMHS), the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (CSAT), the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). 3
Agenda Welcome Melissa Stein, DrPH Senior Research Associate, Policy Research Associates, Inc. Opening Remarks Jon Berg Senior Public Health Advisor, SAMHSA Presentation Kirstin P. Frescoln, PhD, CPM Senior Program Associate Center for Children and Family Futures Brooke O’Byrne, MBA, CADC Senior Program Associate Center for Children and Family Futures Questions Melissa Stein, DrPH Senior Research Associate, Policy Research Associates, Inc. Closing Remarks 4
Opening Remarks Jon Berg Senior Public Health Advisor Center for Substance Abuse Treatment SAMHSA 5
Introducing Today’s Presenters: Kirstin Frescoln, PhD, CPM Is a Senior Program Associate with Children and Family Futures where • she supports implementation of Family Treatment Courts. Has more than 25 years experience developing, implementing, and • evaluating community-based programs and policies to improve the health and well-being of vulnerable individuals and families, at the local, state, and federal level. Held previous positions as North Carolina Drug Treatment Court • Manager; Senior Consultant for the National Drug Court Institute; Senior Research Associate with the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Center for Urban and Regional Studies; and Maternal, Infant, and Child Home Visiting Coordinator with the North Carolina Division of Public Health, Children, and Youth. 6
Introducing Today’s Presenters: Brooke O’Byrne, MBA, CADC Is a Senior Program Associate at Children and Family Futures, where • she serves on the Change Team for two Prevention and Family Recovery Initiative sites (Mecklenburg County, NC and Jefferson County, CO). Has 12 years of experience in previous positions, including Director of • Court Services for Nevada’s Sixth Judicial District Court and board chair of Nevada’s Rural Behavioral Health Policy Board. Founded her community’s first rural outpatient family-centered • treatment facility. Is a Certified Drug and Alcohol Counselor and former director of a non- • profit domestic violence organization. 7
Download the Publication Family Treatment Court Best Practice Standards 8 Standards and Key Provisions To obtain a copy or for more information: Visit: www.cffutures.org 8
Family Treatment Court (FTC) Best Practice Standards: Laying the Groundwork Kirstin P. Frescoln, PhD, CPM, Senior Program Associate Brooke O’Byrne, MBA, CADC, Senior Program Associate Center for Children and Family Futures December 12, 2019
FTC Best Practice Standards — Why They Matter Moving beyond guidance 1. Improve practices and outcomes for children, parents, and families in family treatment courts. 2. Improve outcomes for all families involved with child welfare. 3. Direct state priorities and resources. 10
FTC Best Practice Standards Development July 2017 •Created advisory group and held kickoff event •Reviewed existing literature from the FTC guidelines August 2017 •Created matrix of effective strategies January 2018 •Developed first draft by advisory group November 2018 •Reviewed matrix to further refine draft standards January 2019 •Peer and public review of draft standards February 2019 •Review and edit process September 2019 •Released 11
Family Treatment Court (FTC) Best Practice Standards 1. Organization and Structure 2. Role of the Judge 3. Ensuring Equity and Inclusion 4. Early Identification, Screening, and Assessment 5. Timely, High-Quality, and Appropriate Substance Use Disorder Treatment 6. Comprehensive Case Management, Services, and Supports for Families 7. Therapeutic Responses to Behavior 8. Monitoring and Evaluation 12
Family Treatment Court (FTC) Best Practice Standards 13
Structure of the FTC Best Practice Standards Description – Each standard begins with a descriptive summary paragraph. Provisions – These expand on the description and are mandates stating what FTCs should do; they are designed to be as directive and measurable as possible. Rationale – Describes the reasoning and applicable research base for each provision, drawing upon both practice-based evidence and empirical studies from a wide range of related fields of study. 14
Structure of the FTC Best Practice Standards (cont’d) Key considerations – These provide additional explanation of the provision and practical implementation advice. References – Theses are included at the end of each section. 15
Vulnerable children, parents, and family members require the intensive, collaborative efforts of child welfare, the dependency court, treatment providers, and other community members to meet their complex treatment and service needs. No single agency has the skill or capacity to meet all of their needs. 16
Family Treatment Court (FTC) Best Practice Standards 8 – Monitoring and Evaluation 3 4 5 6 2 7 Early Equity and Screening Timely, Case Role of the Therapeutic Judge Inclusion and Quality Management Behavior Assessment Treatment Response 1 – Organization and Structure 17
Standard 1 18
1. Organization and Structure: Provisions 19
1C: Multidisciplinary Team A multidisciplinary team of professionals includes members from any agency that provides essential services for the children, parents, and families served by the FTC. 20
1C. Multidisciplinary Team — 2 Judge Substance use disorder (SUD) • • treatment provider FTC coordinator • Mental health treatment Child welfare agency/state’s • • provider attorney Child and adolescent services Parent’s attorney • • providers Child’s attorney, guardian ad • Health, educational, vocational, litem and/or court-appointed • recovery and reunifications special advocate support, law enforcement, and Child welfare caseworker • probation 21
1C. Multidisciplinary Team — 2 The attendance of key multidisciplinary operational team members at pre-court staffings and court review hearings helps produce positive outcomes and is part of the core approach of drug courts. (Source: Carey, Mackin & Finigan, 2012) 22
Standard 2 23
2. Role of the Judge: Provisions 24
2C. Participation in FTC Pre-Court Staffing —1 • The judge attends the pre-court staffing along with the FTC coordinator, child welfare agency/state’s attorney, parent’s attorney, child’s attorney, guardian ad litem and/or court-appointed special advocate, child welfare social worker/caseworker, SUD treatment provider, mental health treatment provider, and children’s services providers. 25
2C. Participation in FTC Pre-Court Staffing — 2 • Related health, education, and social service agencies may also participate in pre-court staffing, providing updates critical to the recovery and reunification of children, parents, and families, as well as updates on behaviors that might benefit from a response. • The judge is aware of all applicable judicial canons, the code of ethics, and case law relating to ex parte communication and the appropriate use of information. 26
2C. Participation in FTC Pre-Court Staffing —3 The judge encourages participants to honestly discuss their successes and challenges with parenting as well as their relationships with their children in their efforts to achieve long-term recovery, reunification, and permanency for children. Observational studies suggest that when judges do not attend pre-court staff meetings, they are less likely to be adequately informed about or prepared for interacting with participants during review hearings. (Source: Portillo et al., 2013) 27
Standard 3 28
3. Ensuring Equity and Inclusion: Provisions 29
3. Ensuring Equity and Inclusion —1 There are opportunities to either reduce or exacerbate disproportionality at every stage of a child welfare case. 30
Proportional Access Equitable Treatment Equal Outcomes 31
3. Ensuring Equity and Inclusion —2 An evaluation of the King County, WA Family Treatment Court (KCFTC) examined differences in outcomes between KCFTC participants and a comparison group of nonparticipants. Families of color in the KCFTC entered treatment sooner than those in the comparison group and at a rate equivalent to that of white families in the KCFTC. Further, children of color in the KCFTC were more likely to be returned home (i.e., to have their dependency case dismissed, be reunified, or have a trial home visit) than children of color in the comparison group and had return rates comparable to those of white children in KCFTC. (Source: Bruns, et al., 2011) 32
Standard 4 33
4. Early Identification, Screening, and Assessment: Provisions 34
Recommend
More recommend
