For many foster children, hard life begins as adults

test

A three-parter again folks..don't know why the newreader won't take
longer posts, but there yah go.......be prepared for some rich
entertainment though.

Part One of Three................





Through a fluke, Broward County receives more funding than it
should
for out
of home care. Yet the Grand Jury in that County found that foster
care
continued to be a major problem, despite the increase in funding.

To which, Kane replies:

But, but, but....Doug, not a few months ago you claimed foster care
was
going down....did you not. And that the "problem" was being
resolved,
did you not?

Hi, Kane,

The size of the foster care population is one thing. Funding is
another. I
said that through a fluke Broward County is receiving more funding
than it
should for foster care. And, no, I did not say that the problems of
abuse
and foster care bounce were being resolved.

Nor did I you said "bounce." Look at my statement above..not "bounce"
in it. We have had this conversation before, only a few months ago, and
you claimed foster care numbers were dropping...foster placement
numbers being "the problem."

And here we are, with MORE money, and the problem still in place.
Any
chance the problem is still money related? Like they have an abuse
problem in Florida, and Broward specifically that requires more CPS
services? 0:-

Well, I think that Florida taxpayers would need to know that a 340%
increase
did not solve the problem. You already know my opinion. I have
consistently maintained that money will not solve the problem.

You want to claim the money is exacerbating the problem, stop using a
correlation, (unprovable connection), and try some causal proofs. Got
any?

The problem is being driven by the increase...get that, INCREASE, in
the numbers of substantiated cases the BSO is conducting. It's the
county that went up, as I recall, while the others stayed level,
despite your prediction abuse substantiations would fall by using
"trained investigtors," r r r, which of course they did not have, and
had to hire out of CPS and off the street.

District 10 is now receiving $25,361,756 for out-of-home care,
according to DCF figures, which is a 340% increase over the 1998
allocation. This calculates to approximately $6,000 per child in
out-of-home care (foster care, shelters, relative placements,
and
group
homes), according to DCF's Administration. "

Despite the 340% increase in funding for out of home care, or most
likely
BECAUSE of it, DCF continues to employ caseworkers who are failing
to
meet
regularly with their wards or comply with other regulations.

This is were they go wacky. They think that foster care workers and
caseworkers are the same, so they are using Caseworker when someone
pointed out to the them FOSTER CARE WORKERS who do NOT do client case
work, aren't doing "casework as required." R R R ...and you fell for it
too...watch me prove it again, that there is a division of labor. This
one got totally mucked up here.

The
Grand Jury
notes that DCF, previously noted for its lack of accountablity,
remains
unwilling to supervise the work of its caseworkers.

You seem to have missed that investigations...by BSO increased.
That's
hardly the work of DCF, now is it. The LE investigators do the
removals, Doug. By their findings.

No, no, no. Read the paragraphs again, Kane. The 340% increase was
for out
of home care, not investigations. Out of home care. Out of home
care.
There is nothing in the paragraph about increases in funding for out
of home
care that says anything about any increase in investigations.

No, no, no, Douggie. The most simple logic, and recalling a fact or
two, tells us that because ONE program got increased it does not follow
that others didn't, and the fact? Historically? Easy. You know we
discussed the fact that all the four counties showed they had higer
costs per investigation by LEO.

Do you think there was no money allocated to pay those higher costs?
0:-

Give me some more of your logic. I could con'em at the craps table with
that and walk away rich.

LOL!!

Yes, Douggie. LOL all you wish, and know how very hollow it appears
after I point out your lapses in logic and fact. Unless they are in
arrears, they have to pay salaries for those investigations. Think the
sheriff's office waited to get paid?

Or are you so ignorant that you do know, "caseworker" that services
performed by one agency for another are billed the client agency? Even
the AG's office bills for services. Not only is it a required
accounting practice, it IS THE LAW in most states. Otherwise track is
lost of the funding streams..and that is, as they say, naughty.

"Unfortunately, foster workers, who are now referred to as Family
Services
Counselors, are often the lowest-paid, least-experienced DCF
professional
employees," the Grand Jury reports. "The demands on these workers
can be
tremendous. Although this Grand Jury has met several excellent
foster

workers, we have also seen the havoc a poor or lazy foster worker
can

create. Examples we have seen of the latter type of foster worker
a a
foster worker who failed to notify the foster parent of the foster
child's
potentially violent tendencies, knowing at the time younger foster
children
were in the home, and a foster worker who failed to perform a
proper
home
study prior to the placement of children in a home where a known
sexual
offender lived."

Well, I noticed this very paragraph, and something odd that brought
the
credibility of the grand jury into question.

In the next sentence, that you left off, they start talking about
this
foster workers errors, but in fact the issues quoted were NOT
foster at
all, but worker...regular worker issues of failure. Very confusing.
But
then you like that because you can post out of context and play.

No confusion, Kane. You have created a false duality that seems to
bother
you. The Grand Jury, the Independent research organization, nor I
suffer by
trying to base anything on your false duality. I would suggest you
learn
something about CPS field practice.

No, I've created no false duality. They have missed the boat, and then
you pushed into the water with YOUR igorance. If one reads through
carefully and knows and understands government and specifically CPS
organization and operations they know that foster families answer to
TWO kinds of personnel from CPS. The child's worker, which can change
in the wink of an eye, as children come and go, from many different
workers, and their own "worker." A foster care worker, certifier in
some states, various names around the country.

Just how would a client caseworker keep track of all the foster
families they place children with..they don't place all the children on
their out of home caseload with ONE foster family. They can have 20 or
30 or more children on their caseloads.

They certainly can make life interesting for a foster family, but any
complaints or problems goes back through two supervisors to the FOSTER
FAMILY WORKER, who does everything from accepting the first
application, to doing the home study, which includes crimcheck
handling, medical exam forms, handling references responses, financial
statement review, local non-crim bg check inhouse and out, home
inspection..then on to 90 day inhome checks and interviews with the
foster kids and foster parents (the kids worker, a seperate entity does
the 30 day or is supposed to), annual recertifications...a highly
complex bit with review of foster parent training for the year, another
home and grounds inspection, collecting water sample results in rural
well areas, ...deary me it goes on and on.

And how is this complex changing of the guard handled....different
workers..in fact one for every child is possible, with a foster home?
Which caseworker does the foster parent answer to, and when the foster
parents needs something that isn't specific to a child, who do they go
to? I'll tell yah. The foster home 'certifier' they are called around
here.

One each has about 50 foster families on their load...and it's not a
"caseload" but simply a work load. And that's all they do, all the live
long day, is ride herd on foster families.

You, sir are an ignorant twit that puts up a wonderful front, but
that's all it is.

Want some citations...again? We went through similar before on division
of labor in CPS worker units

I've got a few, but a real careful reading shows how confused this GJ
was...they are NOT experts in child welfare operations, nor should they
be. That's not the purpose of a GJ, or the people that serve on them.

Because of Florida's ongoing reform of privatization of foster
care
services, foster homes have increased and caseloads have gone
down.

A child in foster home does not lower caseloads, Doug. Anyone with
a
lick of knowledge would know, had they followed this over the past
year
or so, that the state had a great many open cases that were NOT
being
dealt with. Those cases are not close, but the remainder still
require
as much or more attention than they were getting before.

Of course a child in foster care does not lower caseloads.

Gee, we concur. Obviously we are making headway. 0:-

That speaks
nothing about the fact that foster care caseloads have dropped in
Broward
County, Florida. Considerably.

Well, we have to consider if that's a real drop, or the closing of
phantoms. Given the stories in the recent past about all those cases
that were not closed, that now are, it follows, if one actually KNOWS
CPS operations and field practice, that of course many of those were
foster placements that in fact had no kid in the placement. They had
gone home, as you know in many cases, and the file was not closed. If
it wasn't closed, then the fact of foster place in the real word was
skewed by recording a child as present when they were absent.

These are the little things that give you away, phony.

Oh. And the recent embarrassing exposure of malfeasance by these
same
contractors?

Yep. They are being held accountable. DCF employees were not held
accountable for their malfeasance.

Oh dear, here we go AGAIN with the insane, turned on its head logic.

You rabid anti Government types are full of this ****. Someone is not
accountable, but they are fired, they are demoted, they are
disciplined, and their malfeasance noted...yet somehow, "they are not
accountable." What would "accountable" consist of in your book, Doug, a
firing squad?

Some here seem about that rabid.

I don't approve of privatizing foster care. It's the point where
children are at most risk in the system, naturally...because there
is
no way to have 24/7 oversight. Putting another layer between the
worker
and this child is NOT good. And it's very costly...as the state is
learning.

Well, the article you cited speaks about the increase of funding that
went
to pay for the privatizing of foster care.

Yeeeees.

You say the money led to
improvement and cited the article.

Was the number of kids in foster care not reduced? 0:- Maybe I misread
you?

So, it appears you believe that
privatization has led to improvement.

No, that does not logically follow. "Privatization" is a general term.
So is "improvement." This is ONE such case, not all privatization.

Some privatization...as I've said in the past, is NOT working out..and
in fact in Florida we have examples of it. The scandals? You know, the
ones you folks feel you must post 48 times in a row for fear someone
might not notice and not be embarassed for being an "apologist." LOL.

It appears that going private is a good investment.

It depends on many factors. One of which will only tell in time. That
would be the safety of the children. You haven't noticed the number of
children that die or are injured in privatized foster care? I have. And
it's written about here. Is your lodged to firmly and your ears and
eyes blocked?

The quality review study found that caseplans were terrible.

Yes, and they, if memory serves, confused that with "foster care
horrors." It's not related to foster care at all.

Your duality.

You don't understand the "Quality Review Study" is a two parter. One by
a private firm, and this GJ report. They are in fact, in the GJ,
confusing foster family workers with caseworkers, because, as I've seen
many times before, the public, hell even the foster parents sometimes,
confuse the two. I've seen foster parents calling the child's
caseworker over their own recert paperwork being held up somewhere.
That's the newbie foster parents. And the client caseworker directs
them to please call their "certifier" the FOSTER PARENT WORKER for that
business.

DCF
caseworkers did not involve parents, children and other family
members to
contribute to setting goals for the plans. (This is such a basic
social
work best practice, that it is unlikely safety plans constructed
without
parent input have ANY effectiveness whatsoever).

Yep, and in states with money, Doug, they ARE involving more.

Oh, so it takes more MONEY for caseworkers to follow the basics of
their job
and involve clients in setting goals for safety/treatment plans?

No, it takes more TIME. Each case likely costs on average about the
same, but the time is the same for each as well, and if one has more of
them, eventually one runs out of time.

Your logic would have them having no case load cap at all, and being
held accountable for quality of work output. Brilliant, just
brilliant..."caaaasssseeeewwwwooooorrrrkkkkkeeeeer rrr" R R R R R
....phony.

At some point we know that quality of planning, setting, execution, and
plain old work, is going to top out and begin to suffer...it's not
malfesance or malpractice, it's mal funding....not enough money for
enough workers to hold caseloads to the standards set by national
review. Roughly 12 to 15 caseloads max for certain types of specialties
(you still don't think there are many of those, do you Doug? R R R )

An investigator, for instance, can have a lot of cases, because they
flow through their hands rather quickly. An ongoing worker, that is
doing the execution and supervision of the elements of the
caseplan...like those family unity meetings, etc. and appearing in
court, etc. and running shotgun on emergencies, etc. can't handle as
many.

An adoption worker can handle more, usually, if they are doing only
adoptoins, as was the case..and may be slipping now. Foster parent
workers, my "certifiers" can and do handle up to 50 with enough
experience, but often in the foster units it's divided up...new
applicants through certification by one or two workers in the unit that
do nothing else in busy urban practices, and ongoing certifiers that
have to do the day to day year in year out drudge work with the foster
families.

In that case, it's reversed. The new applicants foster workers can only
handle a few at a time, because the amount of work is so intense. I
listed some items earlier. They usually have no more than 20 or so at a
time, and many of those washout...bad crimchecks, bad financial
statements, bad health reports, etc. Or just get terrified during the
training when they start to glim on what the truth is about child abuse
and what it does to children and what they will do to each other, the
foster parents, and themselves as a result.

I hope you are remembering some of this, because I'm considering a test
smile because you seem to forget the education I've give you in the
past and keep insisting I don't know casework field practice, Silly
Boy.

"The Quality Service Review also criticized many case plans as
"cookie
cutter" and "one size fits all", citing numerous instances where
everyone
was assigned the same or similar tasks regardless of the relevance
of
such
assignments," said the Grand Jury. "It is very apparent to this
Grand
Jury
that too many case plans have been prepared without regard to the
foster
child or the child's biological family's needs or concerns. Even
more

apparent is the fact that no supervisor was conducting meaningful
reviews of
these case plans."

Sounds pretty bad to me. I notice you are cherry picking like mad,
though.

It is very bad. And the malpractice is going on in Broward County
now.

No it isn't. I Checked the hits I got were mostly all about medical
malpractice suits in Broward, and I'm still trying to find an actual
suit. Are are you just judging before the trial? Laying YOUR standards
on, when you don't even know case practice standards, and barely
understand policy?

their
biological
families. The study questioned whether the group of professionals
providing
services to a particular foster child possessed the necessary
collective
technical skills, knowledge of the family, and access to resources
to

organize effective services for families with complex needs.

Sounds like required spews. It's a very open ended kind of
statement.
One almost anyone could make about almost anyone else. I don't see
the
meat in the statement. It said the study "questioned." Not the
study
doubted, or found that it was not happening as it should. It was a
question. Phrased to appear as though they found something that
proved
services weren't happening.

It sounds like a very harsh criticism to me.

Of course...to YOU. It was a question. This is NOT a panel of experts.
They can't help but be a bit hesitant. They didn't even get it that
their national foster care expert was nonplussed at their question why
a foster care worker was not doing client casework duties. And you to
are confused about that.

YOu keep putting the spotlight on yourself. I guess if you learn enough
from me it will be easier to con the young innocent Kane of the future
that shows up here wonder what the hell you are selling and why. I
might die next week. But there will always be someone like me Doug. And
yah can't fool all of the people all of time, only some some of the
time. Like your two dupes, boober and greegor, the two second bananas.


They should, of course, as the grand jury, question a great many
things. I'm glad they do.

Me, too.

.....end part one of three...........