10:07 AM -- Chairman's Comments

Representative Alexander welcomed members of the Foster Care committee and made opening comments regarding the importance of the committee and its charge. Senator Epps then made comments about the Denver Post articles and how frustrated she felt upon reading them. Senator Epps emphasized responsibility of the Department in overseeing foster care and the Legislature's responsibility to protect Colorado's children.

Jane Beveridge from the Department of Human Services explained why children are placed in foster care as well as how many children are in the foster care system in a given month. Of approximately 8,000 kids, 35% of them are placed in Child Placement Agency (CPA) homes. Neglect, abuse, and delinquency are the primary reason children are removed from their homes. There are a high proportion of delinquent kids, as well as a growing number of sex offenders. In the event of disability or treatment, the family works with the department to develop a treatment plan for the child. Federal law also requires quicker permanent placement or return to family within a shorter length of time. There has been a greater acknowledgment of the price of keeping kids in foster care without a permanent home. Safety has also been an increased emphasis.

Senator Evans asked about how information is maintained on foster parents. Records are maintained by the state and the state is able to access county files to assess what foster families are doing. Sen. Evans asked what "other parental issues" might entail as well as what "neglect" means. Ms. Beveridge explained the different types of neglect, such as medical neglect or lack of supervision.

Senator Epps raised a question regarding "waivers" which counties obtain from potential foster parents who may review information about children.

Senator Rupert talked about possible barriers to access to information that would maintain the privacy of families. It's difficult for counties to identify what might be permissible to share, for example an unsubstantiated report, that might later come to light as problematic.

Senator Linkhart asked whether there have been changes in how children are placed. There has been a shift in where children go to child placement agencies rather than from county foster homes. Now a larger proportion of kids are in CPAs. Representative Alexander asked about whether a moratorium had been considered on CPAs. Privatization was thought to be a positive, however the numbers grew very fast and the state might not have done as well with accountability keeping pace with the growth. At the time of privatization, there was considerable tension between the state and counties. Probably neither the state nor the counties were really prepared for the immense growth.

Five representatives from Colorado counties came forward to discuss the county system. Representative Alexander asked them to also talk about assessments, sharing of information with the state and other parents, and the Family Preservation Program (FPP). Representative Alexander asked whether the rate of pay is based on assessment of the child and the family's capacity to deal with the child's problem, which the county provides assessment of both the family and the child. The administrative rate is $650 per month for placement of the child in a CPA home, however that number doesn't reflect the actual care of the child. The county is then responsible for the monitoring of the CPAs, assessing the child and the family. The El Paso county model is a partnership between the CPAs. The county takes an oversight role to ensure that the facilities are in compliance.

Tom Papin of Mesa County spoke about the county relationship to CPAs and the cost of care. He discussed how Mesa County breaks out cost and responsibility between the county and the CPAs. For the county to provide competitive rates, they had to develop a 3-tiered system based on the needs of the child and strengthening the skills of the parents to provide for the kind of care the children need.

Senator Rupert asked about tracking and assessment and whether they are as "lax" as El Paso county has been reported to be. Mr. Papin said that theirs is not a lax system, that the county has requirements about oversight of families. However, Senator Rupert noted that even in "successful" families, there is little oversight to where money is going.

Representative Morrison asked again about where the money goes, whether or not CPAs seem to be doing a good job. Mr. Papin responded that there is emphasis on cost and how money is spent, as well as emphasis on keeping children out of foster care altogether. The cost is based significantly on the needs of the children and families they work with.

Representative Chavez noted that this is not an "apples to apples" comparison. There is a great disparity between the cost of care and there is a need to identify what the difference is between the numbers. Tom Westfall responded to the questions, stating that there is a way of analyzing the costs. From the perspective of a small community, CPAs are more expensive they would rather strengthen their county providers than bring in CPAs.

Tom Papin said, in response to a question by Senator Linkhart, the county does place easier children in county homes and then moves to CPAs. Doris Puga said that Denver County tends to fill all their county homes first before going to CPAs. David Aldrige of Weld County believes that, at least in his community, county foster homes have been driven out by CPAs. Mr. Malone said that El Paso county has also seen an increase in CPA care, which they believe they have been able to provide at a decreased cost. They have also moved kids into treatment centers and have quadrupled the number of adoptions.

Senator Epps asked whether the cost of placement would have also gone down in response to placing kids with mental health service agencies. Representative Alexander noted that she has heard criticism of the work of mental health centers and their work with children. She asked whether foster parents felt they were getting effective therapy. In addition, she noted identified deficiencies in the FPP. Tom Westfall responded that small counties have tried to emphasize the FPP and noted that he had had considerable success with mental health service agencies. Representative Johnson asked about residential treatment center placement and the role of the county in placing kids there. Mr. Malone responded that El Paso county does have oversight and input in the placement of kids.

Representative Alexander called Carolyn Kampman, Joint Budget Committee (JBC) staff to discuss issues that the JBC had considered. Carolyn responded that things had been relatively quiet in terms of requests of the JBC for funding. Prior to 1997, JBC had called for considerable information from counties for child welfare services. Shift from counties to CPAs was noted and the increased use of RTCs. RTCs are funded through Medicaid counties are not responsible for these costs. Senator Evans asked her to provide information on JBC budget requests regarding foster care for the next two meetings.

Committee break.

12:16 PM -- Colorado's State-Supervised/County Administered Foster Care System

Marva Livingston Hammons spoke about the state supervised, county administered system. She said that communication patterns, practices, ability to use data, setting measurable performance expectations, etc. are the key components to managing any system to provide accountability. Even in a state supervised system, there are field offices, however, it is easier to get them to share information. She said that there are often problems in county homes as well, so perhaps there should be an emphasis on improving the system generally. The Department must take stronger, swifter action when they are aware of problems and be able to determine limits to tolerance of violations. She emphasized that her staff has been following the direction it has had in the past dealing with violations. Under her guidance, the Department is trying to emphasize lower tolerance for problems.

Representative Chavez said he wanted the Department to address ways to fix the current system. Ms. Hammon indicated that the Department was planning to provide such information to the committee. Senator Evans asked about the appropriateness of including the Attorney General in discussing the issues raised regarding foster care. Ms. Hammons responded that her staff and the staff of the AGs office are in fairly consistent communication, but she would to happy to involve him if the committee determined it was necessary.

Representative Morrison asked about the role of the State Board of Human Services in these situations. The Department does go to them when they are interviewed by the media and also when they foresee specific issues that will need to be addressed. Representative Morrison indicated that had there been input from the Board, it might have been possible to address problems through something other than the action of the general assembly. The Board, however, does not typically get involved in the day-to-day workings of the programs. Foster care issues are considered as day-to-day, it has only been in light of the media attention that the department has taken information to the Board. The Department has not been perfect in identifying problems, however, and there are certainly identifiable cases of problems that should have been addressed.

Representatives from the county programs discussed the state supervised/county administered program. Representative Morrison asked them to indicate their feelings about the system of foster care and what might need to be fixed. Mr. Malone stated that he believes there should be changes made in the system, regardless of the model, the level of performance and the standards that are set are the key to a successful program.

Tom Westfall said that while the system is flawed, most aren't significantly better. However, there is obviously room for improvement in the system. The state abdicated some of its oversight responsibility and the counties have become more and more independent without a lot of oversight and guidance from the state. The relationship between the state and counties is not working very well. There is room for the state to take a more stringent role with the counties, put together measures, standards for what practices are acceptable.

David Aldrige said that availability of background checks from the CBI for counties would be helpful. He suggested providing uniform certification requirements for foster homes and requiring disclosure of histories of CPAs between counties and agencies. Doris Puga emphasized the need for better communication between counties and agencies about families. It is possible to work together in this system because Denver has done it. Senator Evans pointed out that the counties are on the front lines who have some oversight of CPAs, and the state department has been questioned about what happened, shouldn't the counties take a bigger role in this? He asked the counties why they just work within narrow guidelines, why not go to the DA and go after the providers who are a problem. Mr. Malone noted that counties do take advantage of the resources available to them to address problems with providers. In addition, the state has been more responsive to problems. Defining the roles and responsibilities among the parties would also be helpful.

Mr. Westfall commented that, in the case of county homes, the foster families are considered an extension of the county department which might provide more accountability. The homes are not considered a business. With a CPA, the county often goes to the CPA to oversee the home and choose the appropriate home and the county does not necessarily oversee the actions of the CPA . There is not a partnership in the same way as there is in the county programs. Representative Morrison asked Mr. Malone whether anyone in the county or department notified him about the problem occurring with the CPA over a period of five years. Mr. Malone said his agency would take quick decisive action on New Outlook. The committee expressed a great deal of frustration because nothing seemed to get resolved. Mr. Malone said he shared the same sense of frustration and was equally appalled. He said that his county has pledged to take very decisive steps in closing or revoking licenses of CPAs in question. Representative Alexander echoed same comments as Representative Morrison. Treva Houck, from Mesa County, said the system was too complex to explain in a question and answer format. There are not enough foster homes to handle the influx of kids needing placement. Senator Evans questioned why the abuses that have been committed in foster homes haven't been reported to the district attorney's office. Ms. Puga described what happens in Denver County. She said that her institutional abuse caseworkers go out and assess the situation and then report any abuses to proper authorities. Ms. Houck described what happens in Mesa County and said that licensing, criminal and civil issues are all sorted out and handled accordingly.

Representative Morrison asked whether the system needs more funds to help it run effectively. She asked the county group to think about this and report later. Senator Evans said he was outraged and asked that the district attorneys and district attorneys council appear at the next meeting.

02:05 PM

Committee break.

Committee returned. David Aldrige talked about corrective action on certain CPAs. Dana Andrews and Jacqueline Sinnett, DHS, provided the committee with information about the specific cases. She said that all of the CPAs mentioned in the news articles still have their licenses, but are being highly monitored by the department. None of the individuals mentioned in the articles are certified as foster care parents. The DHS uses integrated monitoring in an attempt to keep oversight over CPAs. She said that the department created corrective action plans for those in violation and will take swift corrective action to close them if needed. Committee discussion focused on how CPAs receive licenses, how licenses are denied, how the attorney general's office is involved in corrective measures. Senator Evans suggested that the CPAs corporation authority be revoked. Senator Linkhart asked whether the criteria for revoking a license needs to be strengthened. Ms. Andrews described the sequence of events that takes place before revocation. Ms. Andrews described an incident when a foster home was quickly closed due to violations, the state's monitoring team responded in a fast manner, and the due process involved in the decision to close the foster home. Ms. Andrews fielded questions about the specific homes cited in the news articles, the incidents involved, the state's actions and more importantly inaction, and accountability by her agency.

Senator Epps raised questions about the number of children allowed to be cared for in a foster home. Ms. Andrews explained the various options and criteria used to determine the number allowed depending on the situation. Senator Rupert asked about grievances and complaints about certain CPAs and how other counties or individuals find out about these complaints when a CPA moves their operations. Ms. Andrews talked about the various ways that licensing files are available, how individuals can find out about the backgrounds of foster homes, how CPAs share their information. Representative Morrison asked about audits and the news article about reading audits of CPAs. She suggested that the department might want to have someone on staff who can properly read the audits. Ms. Andrews said this was a good idea. The division will be instituting a new database system for tracking foster care.

Sen. Linkhart asked about the 3 year re-certification. It will apply to both county departments and child care placement agencies. The family home would be re-certified by either the CPA or the county. Re-certifying CPAs would not necessarily fix the system. Monitoring and oversight might be more effective than re-certification every three years. Sen. Linkhart then asked about monitoring of county foster homes. There is a division that monitors each child's case. There are also certification workers who go to foster homes on a regulated basis. Case workers are also responsible for monitoring children in CPA foster homes every other months and go to the place where the child sleeps. Additional positions have been allocated, the 24 hour monitoring team, were not on board as quickly as anticipated. They have all been hired and are now at work.

County representatives returned to the table. Rep. Alexander asked about communication between case workers and foster parents. What would be the disciplinary action against the worker, what is the typical communication? Mr. Westfall indicated that his county typically shared everything with the foster family and an employee would be terminated in the event that they did not follow through in sharing information. Ms. Houck also indicated that full information be required to the foster family. The question of whether to share information does come up, in an effort to avoid "labeling" kids. However, in the event that there is no substantiation to the information, they will carefully consider what to do in terms of information. Mr. Malone indicated a disagreement whether the provider had been shared information, he believes that the provider was aware of the child's history prior to taking the child. Ms. Puga reiterated the comments of the other counties regarding the sharing of information. Rep. Chavez asked about whether state people could look at CPA books, was there anyone at the county level who is responsible for monitoring or auditing the CPAs books. There is not a specific staff person in many counties b/c many CPAs work for multiple counties. It might be a good idea to have someone at the state level to do that. Rep. Morrison suggested that, particularly in the larger counties, to have someone in those counties to monitor how CPAs are spending their money. Rep. Alexander indicated concern with the capabilities of the case workers, the necessity of having qualified people. Mr. Westfall, indicated that MSW students are not necessarily well trained to come in right off the bat, and rather there are those who have come up from the trenches and have learned the system.

Representative Alexander thanked the individuals for testifying and legal services staff and called for suggestions for a date for the final meeting. The final meeting for the committee will be on August 7.

The committee adjourned.