|
|---|
|
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|||
| ACF Home | Services | Working with ACF | Policy/Planning | About ACF | ACF News | HHS Home | ||||
Questions?
|
Privacy
|
Site Index
|
Contact Us
|
Download Reader™
|
Print
|
|---|
The onsite review is the second phase of the Child and Family Services Reviews (CFSRs) and primarily is designed to gather qualitative information. The onsite review lasts 1 week and includes the examination of a sample of cases for outcome achievement and interviews with State and local stakeholders to evaluate the outcomes and systemic factors under review. (See chapter 1, section D, for information on the outcomes and systemic factors.) The review takes place in three sites in the State. The State's largest metropolitan subdivision is a required site, and the other two sites are determined on the basis of information in the Statewide Assessment. (See chapter 3 for information on the Statewide Assessment.)
This chapter provides information about the responsibilities of the Children's Bureau Central and Regional Offices, State, and Child Welfare Review Projects in preparing for and conducting the onsite review. (See chapter 2 for information on the roles and responsibilities of specific review team members.) It also provides an overview of the review instruments and the key steps in planning and conducting the onsite review, including case selection and review, interviews with State and local stakeholders, and team debriefings.
During the onsite review, the Onsite Review Team examines case records, conducts case-related and stakeholder interviews, and participates in (or leads) team debriefings, local exit conferences, a full team debriefing, and the statewide exit conference. (See chapter 2, section C, for information on the structure and functions of the Onsite Review Team and Appendix E, CFSR Tips on Creating Onsite Review Schedules. In addition, see section F below for information on the debriefings and exit conferences.) The goal of the case record reviews and case-related and stakeholder interviews is to obtain qualitative information that complements the quantitative information (data indicators, such as data on foster care re-entries and the absence of maltreatment recurrence) reported through the Statewide Assessment.
The onsite review also permits the team to collect information on items/outcomes that is not reported in aggregate form through data collection, such as risk assessment and safety management and the nature of the relationship between children in care and their parents. The combination of the data, reported through the Statewide Assessment, and the information on child and family outcomes and statewide systemic factors, gathered through the onsite review, allows the review team to evaluate programs' outcome achievement and identify areas in which the State may need technical assistance (TA) to make improvements.
The Children's Bureau developed the following standardized instruments for collecting and recording information during the onsite review:
Training on how to use the Onsite Review Instrument and Instructions is provided to review team members before the onsite review. The review instruments are available on the Children's Bureau Web site at www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb.
Preparation for the onsite review includes selecting cases to be reviewed, preparing case records for review, scheduling case-related interviews and State and local stakeholder interviews, preparing reviewer schedules, planning logistical arrangements, providing training, and distributing review-related materials to the review team. These activities are carried out by the Children's Bureau Central and Regional Offices, Child Welfare Review Projects, State central and local child welfare agencies, and Local Site Coordinators. The responsibilities of each are listed below.
The Children's Bureau Central Office does the following in planning for the review:
The Children's Bureau Regional Office assigns a Children's Bureau Regional Office Team Leader to work in collaboration with the NRT Team Leader to guide the review. The Children's Bureau Regional Office Team Leader:
The Child Welfare Review Projects do the following in support of the Children's Bureau in planning for the review:
The State agency does the following in planning for the review:
Each Local Site Coordinator does the following for the review site to which they are assigned:
Receives and secures shipment of tablet computers before the onsite review and releases them to the Local Site Leader at the start of the review week.
See chapter 2, section C.2.4., for additional information about the responsibilities of the Local Site Coordinator.
Before selecting the in-home services and foster care samples, the Children's Bureau Central and Regional Offices and State staff should make the decisions and arrangements described below. These usually are discussed during the review planning conference calls at least 60-90 days before the onsite review.
During the second round of reviews, the Children's Bureau will increase the minimum number of foster care cases reviewed on site in the areas of recent entry, adoption, and older youth in foster care. A total of 65 cases will be reviewed per State, unless unusual circumstances exist and specific arrangements are made between the Children's Bureau and the State to review fewer cases. The breakout of cases in the review sample follows:
After the review sites have been determined, the Children's Bureau draws two random samples of cases to be reviewed (a total of 150 in-home services cases and approximately 150 foster care cases) from the respective universe of cases in the three sites to be reviewed. The sample of in-home services cases is selected by family, and the sample of foster care cases is selected by child. Before the Children's Bureau sends the sample of 150 foster care cases to the State, it randomizes the records in the sample. That step is designed to preclude any bias when the State selects the cases to be reviewed at each of the three sites. In selecting the cases to be reviewed, the State should follow the sequential order in which the cases appear in the two re-randomized samples.
Local Site Coordinators then schedule the 65 cases for onsite reviews across the three sites. At each review site, approximately 15-35 cases are reviewed (for example, the Onsite Review Team typically reviews up to 35 cases in the largest metropolitan subdivision and no fewer than 15 in the other two sites), unless otherwise agreed upon by the Children's Bureau and the State. The Children's Bureau, however, will review no fewer than 15 cases at any review site. The procedures described below provide guidance regarding the two types of samples:
The in-home services samples are family-based and are selected from a universe (list) of cases provided by the State. The Children's Bureau Regional Office will request that the State provide the universe of in-home services cases for the three selected review sites to the Children's Bureau Regional Office no later than 60-90 days before the onsite review. The State should provide the universe as soon as possible after the review sites are selected.
The universe of in-home services cases should include the State's non-foster care cases for which the State's title IV-E/IV-B agency is responsible as defined in State policy, or the families served pursuant to the State's Child and Family Services Plan (CFSP). Juvenile justice cases, mental health cases, and other in-home services cases, even if they are not funded with Federal funds, are to be included in the State's in-home services universe if the services the State IV-E/IV-B agency provides to them, either directly or through contractual arrangements, are provided pursuant to the State's CFSP. This would include, for example, the requirement that a State have a pre-placement preventive services program to help children at risk of foster care placement remain safely with their families.
In determining whether an in-home services case should be included in the universe, the State should consider the following criteria:
For in-home services cases in which a State child welfare agency contracts out the responsibility for providing services, the following case should be included in the sample: a case in which the State's title IV-E/IV-B child welfare agency made the referral for services, paid for the services through Federal or State funds, and monitored the service provision by the contractor, and the family is served pursuant to the State's CFSP.
The Children's Bureau Regional Office staff should determine whether the State's in-home services cases are listed by family or by child. If a State lists its in-home services cases by child instead of by family, the Children's Bureau Regional Office will request that the State provide its list of in-home services cases with the children from each family grouped together. The ease of grouping these cases will depend on whether children from the same family have the same case number or another designation that identifies them as being from the same family.
At a minimum, the State should include the following data elements on the list of in-home services cases that it provides:
The Children's Bureau may request optional data elements from the State, such as elements related to requests for stratification of samples (supervisor identification codes, case type codes for juvenile justice cases, and similar codes). The State should provide this information to the Children's Bureau data team before the sample is drawn.
The State should send the list of the universe of in-home services cases electronically to the Children's Bureau Central Office and notify the Children's Bureau Regional Office when the list is transmitted. The file can be transmitted as an ASCII file (a standard type of file that can be read by any computer) or Microsoft Excel spreadsheet.
Upon receiving the list, the Children's Bureau data team selects a total of 150 in-home services cases from the three review sites, on the basis of the proportion of cases to be reviewed at each site. If 10 of the 25 in-home services cases (40 percent) scheduled to be reviewed are in county A, for example, the Children's Bureau data team selects a sample of 60 (0.4 x 150) in-home services cases from county A's list. If this is not possible, the Children's Bureau data team attempts to preserve the proportionality of the cases scheduled for review at each site to the extent possible. The Children's Bureau then re-randomizes the cases in each sample before transmitting these to the State.
After the State receives the three re-randomized samples, it verifies and finalizes the list of cases to be reviewed, following the guidance provided in section C.3. below regarding eliminating cases. The State schedules cases sequentially from the lists, maintaining the exact order used in the sample provided by the Children's Bureau and eliminating any ineligible cases after consultation with the Children's Bureau Regional Office.
If 25 in-home services cases cannot be scheduled on site, no substitution of foster care cases will be undertaken. At least two alternate in-home services cases should be available from the lists at each site in the event that in-home services cases are eliminated during the onsite review. If the target number of in-home services cases cannot be reached or adjustments across sites are necessary, the Children's Bureau Regional Office will seek to review a minimum of five in-home services cases for the two non-metropolitan sites.
The State's universe of foster care cases is the State's AFCARS submission that corresponds with the sampling period for the three review sites. The universe of cases should comprise children for whom the agency has placement and care responsibility and who are considered to be in foster care on the basis of AFCARS reporting requirements. If juvenile justice or mental health cases are reported to AFCARS consistent with AFCARS requirements, they are part of the universe of cases.
In some States, regions or districts instead of counties are used as review sites. Such States should provide an abridged AFCARS file containing the FIPS codes demarcating the geographic areas selected for the onsite review. The remainder of the abridged AFCARS file should contain the encrypted case numbers and the dates of birth broken out into three columns: one for year, one for month, and one for day. The FIPS code is needed to separate the file into regions or districts. The case number is needed to verify that the sampled cases correspond to the cases being reviewed during the onsite review, once these numbers are decrypted. The crosswalk between the encrypted case numbers and the actual case numbers is needed so that Federal staff can make this determination.
The abridged AFCARS file of foster care cases should be sent electronically to the Children's Bureau, and the State should notify the Children's Bureau Regional Office of the transmission. The file can be transmitted as an ASCII file or as a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet.
The Children's Bureau may request optional data elements from the State, such as elements related to requests for stratification of samples (supervisor identification codes, case type codes for juvenile justice cases, or similar codes). The State should provide this information to the Children's Bureau data team before the sample is drawn.
From the AFCARS file or abridged AFCARS file, the Children's Bureau data team selects approximately 150 foster care cases on the basis of the proportion of cases to be reviewed at each site, using the process described in section C.2.1. For the second round of reviews, foster care cases will be stratified into four categories to achieve an adequate representation of cases in key program areas. The cases will be stratified as presented in the chart below:
| Category of Cases | Number and Description of Cases To Be Reviewed | Rationale for Reviewing Cases of This Type |
|---|---|---|
| Foster Care Category 1 | 10 cases involving children who were ages 16 or 17 as of the last day of the period under review (PUR) or the date that they exited care, as applicable. These children could have any permanency goal and could have entered care either before or during the PUR. | Categories 1-3 may include children entering foster care during the PUR, which will ensure a proportion of this case type that is consistent with the regulation and that will address the need to focus on State practice after the first-round of Program Improvement Plan (PIP) implementation. The case numbers for these categories were based on the need to focus on (1) State practice during the PUR, (2) the emphasis on re-entries, and (3) the focus in the second round of reviews on the population of older youth in care. |
| Foster Care Category 2 | 10 cases involving children who were under age 16 as of the last day of the PUR or the date that they exited care, as applicable. These children will have a current permanency goal of adoption and will have entered care either before or during the PUR. | |
| Foster Care Category 3 | 10 cases involving children who were under age 16 as of the last day of the PUR or the date they exited care, as applicable, and who entered care during the PUR. These cases could have any permanency goal except adoption. | |
| Foster Care Category 4 | 10 cases involving children who were under age 16 as of the last day of the PUR or the date that they exited care, as applicable, and who entered care prior to the PUR. These cases could have any permanency goal except adoption. | This category is intended to allow the random selection of cases with case plan goals other than adoption. These include guardianship, permanent placement with relatives, and other types of cases involving children younger than age 16 with a goal of Other Planned Permanent Living Arrangement. |
After the State receives the list of approximately 150 foster care cases divided into 12 files, 4 for each site, it schedules the cases to be reviewed according to the case order listing, eliminating ineligible cases using the guidance described in section C.3. States should contact the Children's Bureau Regional Office if one or more of these 12 lists are exhausted before scheduling the target number of cases by category. Each site should have at least two cases per category remaining on the lists as alternates in the event that cases are eliminated during the onsite review. States should not substitute cases from one list to supplement another list that incurred a shortfall. The ratio of 10 cases per each of the 4 categories should be maintained.
The table below describes a recommended allocation of the foster care case types across the sites, although this precise distribution may not be possible in all situations. (See Appendix K, Suggested Breakout of Cases by Review Site.)
| Category | Metro Site | Site 2 | Site 3 | State Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Category 1 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 10 |
| Category 2 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 10 |
| Category 3 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 10 |
| Category 4 | 6 | 2 | 2 | 10 |
| Total | 20 | 10 | 10 | 40 |
Local Site Coordinators should record the reasons for eliminating cases from the sample. In addition, the State should submit to the Children's Bureau Regional Office for approval a list of any case(s) that it deletes from the sample and provide the reason(s) that it did so. The State may eliminate cases from the sample for the following reasons only:
The cases in the sample of approximately 150 cases that are not selected for review may serve as substitute cases to replace any selected cases that are eliminated on site or to resolve discrepancies. (See chapter 5, section C, for information on resolving discrepancies.)
The NRT Local Site Leader and the Local Site Coordinator will need to approve decisions to eliminate a case because of last-minute developments that result in insufficient information being available to review the case. If an interview with a critical party to the case is cancelled at the last minute, for example, the case should be eliminated from the sample. The NRT Local Site Leader and Local Site Coordinator then should consider whether sufficient time exists to use a substitute case.
If the State already has identified alternate cases, using the procedures for case selection described in this chapter, it should substitute those cases by following the numerical order provided in the sample. If the State has not previously identified alternate cases, it should use the original sample and follow the sampling procedures described in this chapter to select the substitute case(s).
The State also may draw from these cases to resolve discrepancies between information in the Statewide Assessment and the findings of the onsite review should additional cases need to be reviewed to resolve the discrepancies. (See chapter 5, section C, for information on resolving discrepancies.)
In addition, if during the onsite review an in-home services case is found to have included an episode of foster care during the period under review, it may be reviewed as a foster care case only when an alternative in-home services case cannot be substituted. A foster care case found during the onsite review to involve a family that has received in-home services during the entire period under review may be reviewed as an in-home services case only when no alternative foster care cases can be scheduled, provided no child in the family was in foster care during the period under review.
All case records to be reviewed should be available at the review sites in their entirety, including applicable information for periods preceding the period under review. Case records also should be as orderly and up to date as possible, including any files maintained separately, such as separate child protective services files or separate child and family records. Caseworkers and/or supervisors assigned to these cases also should be available for interviews.
If the child welfare agency uses electronic files instead of or in addition to paper files, the Local Site Coordinator needs to: (1) make computers and technical support available to reviewers so that they can view the electronic records, (2) obtain hard copies of the files or the portions of the files containing information relevant to the review, or (3) use a combination of these two approaches.
If necessary, the State agency obtains confidentiality statements or releases of information before the onsite review to permit reviewers to read case records and conduct case-related interviews. In addition, the Child Welfare Review Projects require that all consultants serving on the Federal team sign an agreement that includes a confidentiality provision.
Onsite Review Team members are responsible for reviewing the case record and interviewing the individuals involved in the cases to which they are assigned. The Local Site Coordinators schedule the case-related interviews to take place after the case record reviews. Reviewers should read the case record before conducting case-related interviews, which will enable them to explore relevant issues with each person interviewed.
The following individuals related to a case will be interviewed unless they are unavailable or completely unwilling to participate:
As needed, on a case-by-case basis, other individuals who have relevant information about the case also may be interviewed, such as the child's guardian ad litem or advocate, or other family members.
Only school-age children are interviewed, unless other arrangements are made with the State. Cases involving preschool-age children may be reviewed but do not require an interview with the child. Instead, the reviewers might observe the child in the home while interviewing the birth or foster parent(s). It is recommended that the State arrange for the assigned caseworker to visit with any child interviewed in the course of an onsite review as soon as possible after the interview to address any issues that may have surfaced.
If possible, interviews with parents, foster parents, and children should be conducted in their homes or foster homes. Service providers may be interviewed wherever is most convenient for them and the review team. When travel arrangements and the schedules of reviewers preclude travel to those locations, or when persons to be interviewed prefer not to have reviewers in their homes or offices, the Local Site Coordinators may arrange to hold the interviews in a central location. Telephone interviews also may be arranged for individuals located outside the review site.
Local Site Coordinators should allow time at the beginning of each day for reviewers to read the cases before the first interview is scheduled. Local Site Coordinators should schedule each interview for 1 hour or less and allow time between interviews for travel between the appointments. Local Site Coordinators also should prepare, in advance, maps or other written directions to the interview sites and provide these to each pair of reviewers. In addition, Local Site Coordinators plan transportation to the interviews; the Child Welfare Review Projects can arrange for rental cars for up to eight consultants who serve as Federal members of the Onsite Review Team. Federal staff usually can rent cars.
Unless specific concerns exist about having reviewers interview someone alone, the assigned caseworker should not be present at the interview. In addition, if concerns exist about the safety of reviewers, or other issues related to the interview, the Local Site Coordinator should take the necessary precautions, such as arranging for the interview to be held in the local child welfare agency office. If special accommodations are required to complete an interview, for example, to address language needs, the Local Site Coordinator makes the necessary arrangements, including obtaining an interpreter, if needed. The consultant pool from which Federal Review Team members are drawn includes individuals with an array of language skills. The Local Site Coordinator should let the State CFSR coordinator know in advance if it would be helpful to have reviewers with special language skills assigned to their site, and the Children's Bureau will work to accommodate the request whenever possible.
The Local Site Coordinator or his or her designee should prepare the individuals to be interviewed, including helping them to understand the purpose of the review. The interviewees should be informed that their participation is voluntary but is critical to the success of the review. Once the Local Site Coordinator has scheduled the interviews, the appointments should be confirmed in writing. (See Appendix G, Preparation for Interviews.)
If, while reviewing a case, reviewers suspect that a child has been, or is in danger of being, maltreated or is at risk of harm, they are obligated to report that information immediately to one of the Local Site Leaders. The Local Site Leaders will report the concerns to an appropriate staff member of the local child welfare agency.
The onsite review includes interviews with State or local representatives (stakeholders) who are knowledgeable about the functioning of the agency in the State and community. The purpose of these interviews is to obtain information about the systemic factors under review and how these affect the outcomes of children and families in general, rather than the outcomes of specific children and families. Stakeholder interviews are distinct from case-related interviews, which are designed to elicit information about specific cases. Information from the stakeholder interviews is used in combination with information from the Statewide Assessment to determine the State's conformity with the CFSP and other program requirements for each of the systemic factors.
The Local Site Leaders interview a complete set of stakeholders at each review site to obtain the local perspective. The Team Leaders interview stakeholders at the State level to obtain a broader, statewide perspective. (See sections D.1. and D.2. below for lists of State and local stakeholders.)
The perspectives and knowledge of individual stakeholders vary, which affects the systemic issues that they can discuss. It is unlikely that individual stakeholders will be able to address each systemic factor with equal knowledge. The Team Leaders (State level) and Local Site Leaders (local site level) must ensure that the combined information obtained from the stakeholder interviews adequately addresses the seven outcomes and seven systemic factors that the CFSRs are designed to assess. The Children's Bureau Regional Office and State must ensure that a sufficient number of stakeholders who have the knowledge to address each systemic factor under review are scheduled for interviews.
An automated Stakeholder Interview Guide is provided to guide Team Leaders and Local Site Leaders in interviewing stakeholders. The Children's Bureau Team Leader, in collaboration with the State and the Children's Bureau Central Office, identifies State-specific issues from the Statewide Assessment that need further examination through stakeholder interviews. These are listed in the appendix of the Stakeholder Interview Guide before the onsite review so that Local Site Leaders explore the same issues in the three review sites. The Stakeholder Interview Guide is available on the Children's Bureau Web site at www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb.
Team Leaders or Local Site Leaders may prefer to have Local Site Coordinators set up group meetings or focus groups with some stakeholders in place of individual interviews; this option can be discussed during a review planning conference call. Group meetings generally should be limited to 8-10 individuals whose interests and involvement in child and family services are similar; for example, groups of foster parents, law enforcement or education representatives, caseworkers, supervisors, or program managers. The State should avoid mixing groups in a way that would limit feedback, such as pairing contracted providers with staff of the overseeing agency or caseworkers with their supervisors. Some interviews should be conducted individually, such as with a juvenile court judge or the director of the State or local child welfare agency.
If possible, State and local stakeholder interviews should be scheduled during regular work hours because the review teams often meet in the evenings for team debriefings. It may be impossible, however, to schedule all interviews during regular work hours. If evening interviews are necessary, the Local Site Coordinators should arrange them at times that do not conflict with the debriefing schedule. If evening group interviews must occur, for example, a focus group with foster parents, these should be arranged as early in the week as possible, preferably on Monday night.
In each State, interviews are scheduled with stakeholders who can address issues of concern to the State as a whole. The Team Leaders conduct these State stakeholder interviews. If the location of the stakeholders relative to the review team presents a logistical problem, the Team Leaders may conduct interviews by telephone. The State Team Leader will provide background information to the stakeholders before the interviews (see Appendix G, Preparation for Interviews).
Before the onsite review, the State Team Leader schedules State stakeholder interviews, in collaboration with the NRT and Children's Bureau Regional Office Team Leaders, and confirms the appointments in writing. No more than 10-12 State stakeholder interviews should be scheduled, unless the NRT or Children's Bureau Regional Office Team Leaders request additional interviews. The interviews usually should be arranged to last 1 hour (1½ hours for groups), and the schedule should allow for travel between appointments.
The following State stakeholders should be scheduled for interviews:
Additional State stakeholders may be selected from among the individuals whom the State consulted in developing its CFSP, such as representatives from the:
Before the onsite review, the Local Site Coordinator schedules a maximum of 10-12 local stakeholder interviews at each review site, unless the NRT or Children's Bureau Local Site Leaders request additional interviews. At the metropolitan site, where there typically are two review teams, the State Team Leader should create one schedule of local stakeholder interviews. The Local Site Leaders for the two review teams then meet to discuss how they will manage the interviews.
Local stakeholder interviews usually should be scheduled to last 1-2 hours, depending on the number of individuals to be interviewed, and the schedule should allow for travel between appointments. Focus groups, for example, require at least 1½-2 hours, while most individual interviews require only 1-1½ hours. In some situations, less than an hour may be needed if the stakeholder is to be interviewed about a specific topic such as quality assurance. Interviews with child welfare agency administrators and others with broad responsibilities usually require 1½ hours.
Local stakeholder interviews may be conducted either at the local agency or where the stakeholders are located. The Local Site Coordinator should prepare the stakeholders for the interviews and confirm the appointments in writing. (See Appendix G, Preparation for Interviews.)
The following local stakeholders must be scheduled for interviews at each review site:
The State also should schedule separate interviews with local-level staff responsible for training, quality assurance, and licensing functions to determine how effectively those areas are operating. This is especially true for States that have county-administered child welfare systems, where local practice may vary.
Additional stakeholders may be selected from the individuals with whom the State consulted in the development of its CFSP, such as representatives of the following:
During case record reviews, case-related interviews, and stakeholder interviews, review team members should be alert for innovative child welfare practices and inform the designated Local Site Leader about promising approaches identified. Promising approaches can be casework-related or systemic and include State and private initiatives that have measurable outcomes and are based on the key practice principles believed to support positive outcomes for children and families: family-centered practice, community-based services, individualizing services that address the unique needs of children and families, and strengthening parents' capacity to protect and provide for their children. At the debriefing at each local site, the NRT Local Site Leader facilitates a discussion of promising approaches identified by the Onsite Review Team.
The review teams at each site meet daily during the onsite review to discuss the day's activities. The debriefings, which are facilitated by the NRT Local Site Leader, are the designated forum for individual reviewers to present their cases and their rationale for the answers recorded on the Onsite Review Instrument. The debriefings provide an opportunity for Local Site Leaders and reviewers to ensure that all reviewers are consistent and are able to substantiate their findings with adequate information. The debriefings provide opportunities for case discussion within a structured agenda to ensure that all cases are adequately debriefed by the team. Attendance at the debriefings is limited to Local Site Leaders, reviewers, and one State representative who does not supervise any cases under review at the local site. This State representative is included as an observer only and may not participate actively in the debriefings or ratings of the cases.
The debriefings should occur following the day's onsite review activities. During the debriefings, the local review team does the following:
On Thursday morning or afternoon of the review week, once all activities are completed at the review site, the NRT Local Site Leader convenes the local review team for a final local site debriefing. During this final debriefing, the Local Site Leaders use the CFSR Data Management System to complete the Summary of Findings Form for their site, incorporating information on all cases reviewed and all stakeholder interviews. The completed Summary of Findings Form is submitted electronically to the Team Leader. Following the debriefing, the NRT Local Site Leader holds a local exit conference and provides a verbal report to the local site, offering preliminary information regarding the local review findings, including strengths and areas needing improvement. This allows for the sharing of detailed, site-specific information with the local participants who are most likely to benefit, including but not limited to caseworkers, supervisors, or local administrators. Consultant reviewers are dismissed from the review following the local exit conference.
On Friday, the three local sites come together for a debriefing and exit conference facilitated by the NRT Team Leader. The Local Site Leaders, including the State Local Site Leader, represent the local site team at the Friday debriefing and exit conference. Attendance of State reviewers at the Friday debriefing and exit conference is not required, but is at the option of the State.
Before the debriefing, the Team Leader uses the compiled results from the three review sites to facilitate a discussion of the review findings. Unlike the local site debriefings, in which attendance is limited to the review team and one State representative, key State child welfare agency staff who are not part of the Onsite Review Team may observe the statewide debriefing. The State, in consultation with the Children's Bureau Regional Office Team Leader, may invite key State agency staff to attend who they believe will benefit from hearing about the findings at the local level and should consider including staff who will have major responsibility for planning program improvements.
Subsequently, at the statewide exit conference on Friday afternoon, the NRT Team Leader provides the State with a PowerPoint presentation generated using the CFSR Data Management System on the preliminary findings regarding the outcomes and systemic factors. This allows the review team to identify for the State the key areas on which the State should focus in developing its Program Improvement Plan. The findings are presented as preliminary because a complete analysis of the information is not possible until after the onsite review. States may invite participants of their choosing to the statewide exit conference.
The determination of the State's substantial conformity is included in the written Final Report provided to the State following the onsite review. (See chapter 6 for information on the preparation and distribution of the Final Report.)
Return to Table of Contents
