Section V: Case Review System (Items 25-29)

Item 25: Written Case Plan

The State provides a process that ensures that each child has a written case plan to be developed jointly with the child's parent(s) that includes the required provisions.

Respondents:

Administrative Review Bodies, Agency Attorney(s), CASA - Court Appointed Special Advocate(s), Caseworker(s) from the Local Agency - Foster Care Staff, Child and Family Advocate(s), Child Attorney(s), Child Placing Service Provider(s), Court Improvement Program Coordinator(s), Foster and Adoptive Parent(s), Group Care Provider(s), Guardian(s) Ad Litem/Legal Representative(s), Juvenile Court Judge(s), Juvenile Justice Representative(s), Local Child Welfare Agency Administrator(s), Local Representative(s) of Administrative Review Bodies, Major Tribal Representative(s), Parent Attorney(s), Prevention and/or Reunification Service Provider(s), State Child Welfare Director(s), State Child Welfare Program Specialist(s), State Court System Representative(s), State Foster and/or Adoptive Parent Association Representative(s), State Representative(s) of Administrative Review Bodies, Supervisor(s) from the Local Agency, Tribal Representative(s), Youth Being Served by the Agency, Youth Being Served by the Local Agency, Youth Service Agency Representative(s)

Core Question:

1. Determine and document which of the seven outcomes and systemic factors examined during the Statewide Assessment are primarily strengths, citing the basis for the determination.
   
   
2. Determine and document which of the seven outcomes and systemic factors examined during the Statewide Assessment are primarily areas needing improvement, citing the basis for the determination. Identify those areas needing improvement that the State would like to examine more closely during the onsite review, for example, to explore possible causal factors. Prioritize the list of areas needing improvement under the safety, permanency, and well-being outcomes.
   
   
3. Recommend two additional sites for the onsite review activities, using the strengths and areas needing improvement noted in 1 and 2 (the State's largest metropolitan area is a required location). Attempt to select sites in which the issues identified through the Statewide Assessment will be present and observable. Note the rationale for selecting these sites; if there are no issues that require further examination during the onsite review, explain which factors the State considered in site selection (for example, the need for a mix of rural and urban areas or for areas with typical practices). When making recommendations, the State should include all available data, including comparative data for the suggested sites in relation to statewide data, if available.
   
   
4. Provide comments about the State's experience with the Statewide Assessment Instrument and process. This information will assist the Children's Bureau in continually enhancing the Child and Family Services Review (CFSR) procedures and instruments.
   
   
5. Provide the names and affiliations of the individuals who participated in the Statewide Assessment process; please also note their roles in the process.
   
   

Back to Top

Back to Table of Contents