DCYF cites high caseloads, looks at adding 24/7 staffing | Concord Monitor:
Heavy workloads and high staff turnover at the state’s Division for Children, Youth and Families are impacting the agency’s ability to keep children safe, according to a recent report from the division.
My Comment: What sense does it make to hire more DCYF worker's when the children were placed back in the home while Criminal charges were pending against the Mother? More caseworkers couldn't have stopped this death. DCYF and the Judge dropped the ball on this one. If the kids weren't returned to a Mother criminally charged with their abuse, this precious little girl wouldn't be dead now.
The only way to stop this from happening again, is reform of DCYF and the Family Court's. My one question; What sense does it make to return children to a home where their Mother has Criminal abuse charges pending, but never return children to a home where Criminal charges against the parent are dropped due to evidence of innocence? Sounds backward doesn't it? That's because it is!
Isabella Brooke Knightly and Austin Gamez-Knightly
In Memory of my Loving Husband, William F. Knightly Jr. Murdered by ILLEGAL Palliative Care at a Nashua, NH Hospital
Sunday, February 28, 2016
Texas CPS makes changes after child deaths
Texas CPS makes changes after child deaths | KXAN.com:
AUSTIN (KXAN) — A new report details changes in a Texas agency after child abuse and neglect deaths across the state, including a central Texas case that galvanized the attention of the community.
AUSTIN (KXAN) — A new report details changes in a Texas agency after child abuse and neglect deaths across the state, including a central Texas case that galvanized the attention of the community.
How Are We Spending Child Welfare Dollars?
How Are We Spending Child Welfare Dollars? | OPEN MINDS:
In FY2012, the latest year data is available, the United States spent $28.2 billion on child welfare services. Using state estimated expenditures from FY2013, $22.9 billion dollars were traceable to spending on administrative costs and direct service provisions. Of that $22.9 billion, the largest amount was spent on the administrative service related to foster care and the second largest amount was spent on family support services, and independent living services. Spending on all services was as follows:
Santa Clara Lawyer Lies - Investigative Reporter Is Witness
Petition update · Santa Clara Lawyer Lies - Investigative Reporter Is Witness · Change.org:
Feb 28, 2016 — An investigative reporter was jotting down notes in the hallway of 1550 The Alameda #1550 on Tuesday, February 23, 2015, when Brad Baugh entered the building following a deposition with a well know family law consultant. Thinking the corridor was vacant , Mr. Baugh caught another attorney and said " oh hey I lied for you the other day to help you out with the Judge". Mr. Baugh went on to explain how he was working with Judges and other lawyers to make the litigant on one side look bad.
Feb 28, 2016 — An investigative reporter was jotting down notes in the hallway of 1550 The Alameda #1550 on Tuesday, February 23, 2015, when Brad Baugh entered the building following a deposition with a well know family law consultant. Thinking the corridor was vacant , Mr. Baugh caught another attorney and said " oh hey I lied for you the other day to help you out with the Judge". Mr. Baugh went on to explain how he was working with Judges and other lawyers to make the litigant on one side look bad.
Senate passes bill that helps give divorced parents equal time with their children
Senate passes bill that helps give divorced parents equal time with their children | Tampa Bay Times:
TALLAHASSEE — Judges soon may have little choice but to give divorcing parents equal time with their children. The Senate on Tuesday passed a change to divorce law that would require judges to presume that it is best for children to split time equally with both parents and to issue a detailed order if they deviate from that standard.
Why not in NH? And everywhere else for that matter!
TALLAHASSEE — Judges soon may have little choice but to give divorcing parents equal time with their children. The Senate on Tuesday passed a change to divorce law that would require judges to presume that it is best for children to split time equally with both parents and to issue a detailed order if they deviate from that standard.
Why not in NH? And everywhere else for that matter!
Saturday, February 27, 2016
NH Law Pertaining to Relative Placement-Again, Not Followed by NH DCYF
http://www.dhhs.nh.gov/dcyf/
NH Law Pertaining to Relative Placement-Again, Not Followed by NH DCYF
By law, the State of New Hampshire must make efforts to identify and notify all adult relatives of a child within 30 days of a child going into placement. If a family relative is not available or not appropriate, the child may be placed in a licensed foster home.
When a grandparent or other relative is identified as an appropriate caretaker for a child in State custody, he or she can become licensed by DCYF to provide foster care for the child. While this is not a requirement, it is strongly recommended that they become a licensed relative foster home as they may receive additional financial assistance as well as additional support services. (Unless you're Austin and Isabella's grandmother who took Foster care classes and was STILL denied placement of her grandchildren and a Foster care license by Supervisor Tracey Gubbins.)
NH Law Pertaining to Relative Placement-Again, Not Followed by NH DCYF
By law, the State of New Hampshire must make efforts to identify and notify all adult relatives of a child within 30 days of a child going into placement. If a family relative is not available or not appropriate, the child may be placed in a licensed foster home.
When a grandparent or other relative is identified as an appropriate caretaker for a child in State custody, he or she can become licensed by DCYF to provide foster care for the child. While this is not a requirement, it is strongly recommended that they become a licensed relative foster home as they may receive additional financial assistance as well as additional support services. (Unless you're Austin and Isabella's grandmother who took Foster care classes and was STILL denied placement of her grandchildren and a Foster care license by Supervisor Tracey Gubbins.)
42 U.S.C. § 671(a)(19) Placement of Children With Relatives
https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubPDFs/placement.pdf
New Hampshire Does NOT Give Preference to Relatives, so why do they STILL receive Federal Title IV Funding?
In order for States to receive Federal payments for foster care and adoption assistance, Federal law under title IV-E of the Social Security Act requires that they “consider giving preference to an adult relative over a nonrelated caregiver when determining placement for a child, provided that the relative caregiver meets all relevant State child protection standards.”1 Title IV-E further requires States to exercise due diligence to identify and provide notice to all grandparents and other adult relatives of the child (including any other adult relatives suggested by the parents) regarding (1) the fact that the child has been or is being removed from the custody of his or her parents, (2) the options the relative has to participate in the care and placement of the child, and (3) the requirements to become a foster parent to the child.2
Giving Preference to Relatives for Out-of-Home Placements
Each State defines “relative” differently, including relatives by blood, marriage, or adoption ranging from the first to the fifth degree. Generally, preference is given to the child’s grandparents, followed by aunts, uncles, adult siblings, and cousins. For Indian children, nine States allow members of the child’s Tribe to be considered “extended family members” for placement purposes.3 Approximately 45 States and Puerto Rico give preference or priority to relative placements in their statutes.4 Massachusetts, Ohio, Wyoming, and the District of Columbia require childplacing agencies to give preference to placements with relatives in regulation. In 17 States and Guam, State agencies are required to make reasonable efforts to identify and locate a child’s relative when out-of-home placement is needed.5 New Hampshire, American Samoa, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands use statutory language such as “may consider” placement with relatives. West Virginia and the Northern Mariana Islands do not address the issue of the placement of children for foster care with relatives in their statutes. In all cases, before a child can be placed in the home of a relative, the child-placing agency must do an assessment to determine that the relative is “fit and willing” to provide a suitable placement for the child, able to ensure the child’s safety, and able to meet the child’s needs. Approximately 28 States and the District of Columbia require relatives to undergo a criminal background check that may include all adult members of the household.6
New Hampshire Does NOT Give Preference to Relatives, so why do they STILL receive Federal Title IV Funding?
In order for States to receive Federal payments for foster care and adoption assistance, Federal law under title IV-E of the Social Security Act requires that they “consider giving preference to an adult relative over a nonrelated caregiver when determining placement for a child, provided that the relative caregiver meets all relevant State child protection standards.”1 Title IV-E further requires States to exercise due diligence to identify and provide notice to all grandparents and other adult relatives of the child (including any other adult relatives suggested by the parents) regarding (1) the fact that the child has been or is being removed from the custody of his or her parents, (2) the options the relative has to participate in the care and placement of the child, and (3) the requirements to become a foster parent to the child.2
Giving Preference to Relatives for Out-of-Home Placements
Each State defines “relative” differently, including relatives by blood, marriage, or adoption ranging from the first to the fifth degree. Generally, preference is given to the child’s grandparents, followed by aunts, uncles, adult siblings, and cousins. For Indian children, nine States allow members of the child’s Tribe to be considered “extended family members” for placement purposes.3 Approximately 45 States and Puerto Rico give preference or priority to relative placements in their statutes.4 Massachusetts, Ohio, Wyoming, and the District of Columbia require childplacing agencies to give preference to placements with relatives in regulation. In 17 States and Guam, State agencies are required to make reasonable efforts to identify and locate a child’s relative when out-of-home placement is needed.5 New Hampshire, American Samoa, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands use statutory language such as “may consider” placement with relatives. West Virginia and the Northern Mariana Islands do not address the issue of the placement of children for foster care with relatives in their statutes. In all cases, before a child can be placed in the home of a relative, the child-placing agency must do an assessment to determine that the relative is “fit and willing” to provide a suitable placement for the child, able to ensure the child’s safety, and able to meet the child’s needs. Approximately 28 States and the District of Columbia require relatives to undergo a criminal background check that may include all adult members of the household.6
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)