If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Part two of three...... For many foster children, hard life begins as adults
.....part two of three............. Yep, but I know they are not supposed to be experts, whose every thought and declaration is based on them having a full understanding of facts. The give that very special contribution though, a fresh eye, and citizen oversight. I love'em, even if I stay factual about them and their capacity. You remember what I used to say, "goverment requires diligent citizen oversight." Well, the 340% increase in funding went to out of home placements. And both the independent study and the current Grand Jury found that this system was still failing. Where then did the money come from for the increase in cost for each investigation, noted by the UPenn study? Who is paying the increased cost for all those civilian investigators hired by the BSO Your cited article about the grand jury says that BSO hired a mere 10 workers from DCF. And you presume thats all they hired? And you presume that their pay was peanuts? Let's assume, for a real laugh, their pay was $35k, per annum. Let me see where IS that trusty calculator...gosh this is a tough one. $350,000 Dougger. Isn't that about what it would be? Got to come from some'are's eh? Would you mind pointing to the part of the report by the GJ that shows that them increase all went to out of home care? Thanks. Sure. "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. And Dougger, isn't placement costs part of out of home care? And who puts the child in placement and has to be paid their salary, Dougger? It's spelled, I N V E S T I G A T O R, Douggie. One of the out of home care costs. In fact, I've a hunch one of the reasons the cops hired CPS workers for the job was to do the initial placement planning...you know, what to write up for D'judge to see as to the suggested outcome of the investigation, out of home, or return to home, and then, Douggie, the service plan. Does DCF do it, or like times of old when they did the investigation, does the intake investigator do it? Yah see, the GJ isn't going to get that all sorted out, and neither are we from this remove. So we don't know what falls under that 340% increase in WHO actually gets the money. It's sure not foster parents all that much. 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." Your source, about 1/4 way down the page. http://www.sao17.state.fl.us/grandjury.htm I love this one. You think it proves one thing, and to me, who knows operations, it proves quite another. "The Quality Service Review noted that District 10's performance in engaging the child and the biological and/or foster parents in any meaningful way was deficient. Now watch. That is NOT them. The Quality Service Review, if you can read and follow and remember, was another private review, paid for by the taxpayers, as a result of ...guess what...a class action suit...e e e e ... We asked a national expert in foster care There it is above. They are asking someone who is not, obviously, up to speed o what they are talking about...unaware of their confusion. why District 10's foster caseworkers failed to implement such obviously beneficial practices as inclusion of the foster child's biological family in discussions and plans for the child and formulation of relevant and clearly identified case plan goals and objectives. Why WHAT? WHAT? WHAT? Why the foster care workers (they used caseworkers and foster together mistakenly...they had been watching vidoes of performance reviews and didn't understand who they were watching.) hadn't done client casework? RR R R R....WHAT A CACKLE. Caseworkers normally do NOT do foster care worker duties, nor do foster care workers do caseworker duties. They are in most places two different sets. The child's caseworker has NO time to do foster parent supervision. They would only see them once a month, at best, and sometimes not that if they met the child on their caseload elsewhere. Like in the office. No, the foster parents have to have a single constant in their lives...and can't be answering to five or six different caseworkers, who they might have one for each of the children in their home. The expert could not explain this failing. Well, I guess. EHEHEHHEHEHE....TOO MUCH. And you fell for it, like the ignorant phony you are. So tell us, Douggie, how is a client caseworker with say 20 kids..probably many more in some places, on their caseload, who has to place them going to FOSTER CARE WORKER say five or six foster parent families, and do their client casework with child and parents? It's impossible. The complexity is unsurmountable. The only place this is done is in little rural burgs, and not that often there, with so few cases one worker can go mad all by their lonesome and try to do it all. Go ahead, fill us in, CASEWORKER! Blown, Douggie, by yourself. You've had "workers" doing investigations then ongoing work too on the same case, and I suppose foster parent management, and adoption homestudies, and appearing in court, and ...well, we KNOW, you and I, me a former worker for CPS in the early 80s and you one now, how complex and time consuming all this is. R R R...I don't think I'll be able to sleep tonight. I just know I'll wake up roaring with laughter. Yah know, this is the part that is so wondefully confusing about the GJ. See above...they are asking why a Foster care worker isn't doing CASEWORK with the bio family. They pretty obviously do not know that Foster care workers work with the foster family and caseworkers word with client families. I worry that some of my own arguments from this document might be compromised by this ignorance of operational facts. Florida now calls its foster care caseworkers "family service workers." The Grand Jury uses this term interchangeably with the less formal "caseworker" and "worker." I don't care what they are called. That is the client caseworker with children in foster care. The FOSTER worker is a separate entity and has to be. No client worker could handle the load of both kinds of families to manage. And the GJ got the two confused. That's why the expert on foster care they consulted was unable to answer the incongruous question they asked about why the "foster care worker" failed to do the client related tasks. Foster care workers for foster families do NOT do client work or contact, the latter by accident maybe, but not officially. And I wonder that YOU, "caseworker" didn't catch that. Nothing to catch, "non caseworker." Oh? R R R R R R ....HEHEHEHEHH.........OOOOO....YER KILLIN' ME. "It is clear that those caseworkers who fail to plan properly or to consult with the child and the family, where appropriate, in constructing case plans, are actually making their jobs more difficult. Notice we are now talking about the "caseworker" not the "foster caseworkers." Your duality. Not the Grand Jury's. OH? I'll bet you'll try to say this statement is calling the same worker by two different titles...it's from the document we are considering: " Foster care workers and other family services workers are also performing a dangerous job. In a recent DCF survey of its employees, the greatest stress these family services workers identified was concern for their own safety. " "Other family services workers?" What might THOSE be, Doug. Go ahead, give us a list. Why would a "foster care worker" be concerned for their personal safety? They are doing foster care work. That isn't contact with parents, just foster parents. Gosh, you don't suppose the foster parents are made up of some of the folks we've had on this ng in the not too distant passed? The ones that celebrated the death of a caseworker by stabbing, and claimed Brian wouldn't have been a murderer if he'd killed the workers he held up? Boy, that would be bad, eh? No, Doug. It's because the "family service workers" are the client caseworkers and the "foster care workers" would see ONLY the foster families, and the children in those foster placements. Even if, and I hope so, they have a high level of responsibility for the children there and ARE doing the 30 day face to faces for the "family service workers" they are NOT doing case planning. The very thing they confused the foster care expert by asking about. And you didn't sort this out correctly. Hmmmm...I wonder what's up with that...as if I didn't figure you out for a phony two years ago...r r r r .....end of part two of three........... |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Department of Human Services, shows that rates of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) among adults who were formerly placed in foster care (alumni), were up ... | wexwimpy | Foster Parents | 0 | April 7th 05 04:36 PM |
The gift of foster care | wexwimpy | Foster Parents | 0 | May 29th 04 10:29 PM |
'Horrible' Home | Kane | General | 1 | July 16th 03 02:29 AM |
| Database should audit high $$ in Foster Care system | Kane | General | 3 | July 15th 03 06:43 AM |