A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

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.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » alt.support » Foster Parents
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Fern blows Doug out of the water.....was.... DSHS faulted 4 inefficient foster checks,Washington state



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 18th 04, 06:02 AM
Kane
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Fern blows Doug out of the water.....was.... DSHS faulted 4 inefficient foster checks,Washington state

On 17 Sep 2004 15:26:48 GMT, (Fern5827) wrote:

One of the problems with CPS, DSHS is that the system is riddled with
inefficiencies, unbusinesslike practices, and absolute stupidities.

http://www.theolympian.com/home/news...n/129353.shtml

This Op-Ed bolsters this assertion.


No, actually it doesn't do what your subject line says, nor is it
inefficient for anything but overload....20,000 background checks a
month, and holdups because of errors on the app form...now WHO exactly
fills out the APP form, WA CPS or the applicant?

You'd better read more closely. This is supportive of CPS in WA state
as being overloaded but doing a yeoman job under the circumstances.

The writer makes an error common to the uninitiated public though,
which is rather odd coming from what Doug would likely label a
"jackleg."

The reason background checks that cleared a person for one position
are NOT used when they go and apply to the state is that THERE IS NO
PROOF THE FIRST PERSON IS THE SECOND ONE. People can loan ID, and
people can STEAL someone's ID as we all know.

There is a sound security reason involved. I was involved with a
relative that got turned down for placement because of very serious
criminal charges in her background....THAT SHE CLAIMED SHE KNEW
NOTHING ABOUT...no one could figure it out until a CPS office worker,
a support staff, ran the name a couple of times on the whole family
and low and behold this lady had a sister that many many years before
had some criminal charges.....and shortly after, there was her sister
doing the same crimes....

Figured it out yet?

Yes, the sister stole her ID, name, SS number, DL number, the works.
She even fraudulently applied for welfare in her sisters name but
their first names were close enough and SS # close enough that the
welfare people missed that they were looking at the work history of
the criminal lady...who of course was eligible for welfare because she
was indigent, but under name and SS # of the sister.

So not only did the relative's drug and shoplifting and assault show
up on her, my friend's, background check, thanks to her sister, she
was also ID'd as a welfare fraud.

CPS wouldn't tell her why, until I asked my support staff friend to
run the checks and report them to the foster certifier. The whole
thing got straightened out in a couple of hours. And a couple of face
to faces with the people at the welfare office and the arresting
officer....both were quite sure my lady was not her sister.

And there are many reasons people might try to use a fake ID to
foster....like they are a pervert that wants to get next to children
and use a safe person's background. Or someone LIKE YOU THAT THINKS
FOSTER PARENTS GET RICH ON FOSTER CHILD SUBSIDIES AND SIGNS UP TO
"make money."

Each foster, each worker that is a new applicant gets an entirely
separate distinct background check, no matter if some other work
place, government or private is running one of their own. The
fingerprints of the person applying, face to face with staff taking
the apps, and doing the fingerprinting, and doing the questions from
the back of the app with the applicant...the one's that say "were you
ever convicted" is a very good check against someone getting away with
fraud or child endangerment as a criminal.

Don't we all wish FL knew about the ladies that lost Rilya...problem
is they had no criminal background that anyone could find.

And sadly, you just proved Doug was very mistaken. He claims one thing
about background checks, and I another. and this piece, of believed,
proves I'm right, as usual.

He knows ****, and little enough of that.

Here's what I said to Doug and what he replied on this issue on July
24, 2004...earlier this year.

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=cr...s.com&rnum =1

Kane.....
I KNOW it is. That doesn't mean it's a full crim check and it sure as
hell isn't FBI interstate such as foster and adoptive applicants have
to have if they have lived outside their present state of residence in
the past five years....(varies from state to state I believe).

( I was referring to NCIC bg checks he denies are run on anyone below)

Doug......
"NCIC background checks are not run on ANY principal, client or foster
or guardian applicant. CPS in my jurisdiction is not allowed access
the the FBI's database (NCIC).

Kane.........
In other words, there IS not real crim bg check, is there Dungslinger?

(I was being facetious and he knew it of course or would not have
answered...)

Doug.......
No, in other words, there is a real criminal background check done.
Not an FBI one, however.

So, point out to him that post from a WA vendor, a "jackleg"
apparently. who claims:

"Background checks are multilayered and unnecessarily complex. As many
as four state and private agencies can be involved in one request. If
the applicant has lived out of state any time during the past three
years, fingerprints also are required. The Washington State Patrol
then conducts an FBI check. Now, we have five agencies involved."

Now WA state, just as all the other state police or local police don't
just sit on the results and look them...they pass them to the
requestion agency...and that is WHO?

Why the respective state CPS', that's who....which goes to show again
what Doug doesn't know.

Read the article again...there are considerable errors but overall WA
CPS seems to be doing a remarkable job considering the reality of WHY
bg checks are done....FOR SECURITY REASONS, and you do not cut corners
on such things and not have children, families and the work product of
the child protection agencies compromised and hurt.

When ARE you idiots going to wake up to reality? Epecially the reality
that you are always a mile or two off the exact facts but sure you
know it all?

Kane

CPS, WASHINGTON, SOCIAL WORK, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL REHABILITATIVE

SERVICES, KIN
CARE, KINSHIP CARE, FOSTER CARE

  #2  
Old September 25th 04, 10:14 PM
Doug
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Kane writes:

Kane.....
I KNOW it is. That doesn't mean it's a full crim check and it sure as
hell isn't FBI interstate such as foster and adoptive applicants have
to have if they have lived outside their present state of residence in
the past five years....(varies from state to state I believe).

( I was referring to NCIC bg checks he denies are run on anyone below)

Doug......
"NCIC background checks are not run on ANY principal, client or foster
or guardian applicant. CPS in my jurisdiction is not allowed access
the the FBI's database (NCIC).

So, point out to him that post from a WA vendor, a "jackleg"
apparently. who claims:

"Background checks are multilayered and unnecessarily complex. As many
as four state and private agencies can be involved in one request. If
the applicant has lived out of state any time during the past three
years, fingerprints also are required. The Washington State Patrol
then conducts an FBI check. Now, we have five agencies involved."


Hi, Kane!

Fern's post or the article she quotes does not in any way dispute my claim
that CPS cannot and does not run NCIC checks. Nor does CPS run these NCIC
checks through law enforcement agencies.

CPS is not a law enforcement agency and therefore denied access to NCIC by
the FBI.

Doug





  #3  
Old September 26th 04, 04:25 AM
WitchWirsen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

NCIC?
I signed a permission to do a background check with the FBI when I apped to
foster.
If NCIC is a background check with the FBI then DFS most certainly DOES do
them.
"Doug" wrote in message
...
Kane writes:

Kane.....
I KNOW it is. That doesn't mean it's a full crim check and it sure as
hell isn't FBI interstate such as foster and adoptive applicants have
to have if they have lived outside their present state of residence in
the past five years....(varies from state to state I believe).

( I was referring to NCIC bg checks he denies are run on anyone below)

Doug......
"NCIC background checks are not run on ANY principal, client or foster
or guardian applicant. CPS in my jurisdiction is not allowed access
the the FBI's database (NCIC).

So, point out to him that post from a WA vendor, a "jackleg"
apparently. who claims:

"Background checks are multilayered and unnecessarily complex. As many
as four state and private agencies can be involved in one request. If
the applicant has lived out of state any time during the past three
years, fingerprints also are required. The Washington State Patrol
then conducts an FBI check. Now, we have five agencies involved."


Hi, Kane!

Fern's post or the article she quotes does not in any way dispute my claim
that CPS cannot and does not run NCIC checks. Nor does CPS run these
NCIC
checks through law enforcement agencies.

CPS is not a law enforcement agency and therefore denied access to NCIC by
the FBI.

Doug







  #4  
Old September 26th 04, 05:06 AM
Ron
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"WitchWirsen" wrote in message
news:bFq5d.119043$D%.4421@attbi_s51...
NCIC?
I signed a permission to do a background check with the FBI when I apped

to
foster.
If NCIC is a background check with the FBI then DFS most certainly DOES do
them.


They do DOJ checks here in Neb., as well as Registry checks and
fingerprints. I'd assume that they run those through the NCIC Fingerprint
database. CPS can get its own connection to the NCIC system for little cost
since it is a state agency and has a reason to have it.

Ron


"Doug" wrote in message
...
Kane writes:

Kane.....
I KNOW it is. That doesn't mean it's a full crim check and it sure as
hell isn't FBI interstate such as foster and adoptive applicants have
to have if they have lived outside their present state of residence

in
the past five years....(varies from state to state I believe).
( I was referring to NCIC bg checks he denies are run on anyone below)

Doug......
"NCIC background checks are not run on ANY principal, client or foster
or guardian applicant. CPS in my jurisdiction is not allowed access
the the FBI's database (NCIC).

So, point out to him that post from a WA vendor, a "jackleg"
apparently. who claims:

"Background checks are multilayered and unnecessarily complex. As many
as four state and private agencies can be involved in one request. If
the applicant has lived out of state any time during the past three
years, fingerprints also are required. The Washington State Patrol
then conducts an FBI check. Now, we have five agencies involved."


Hi, Kane!

Fern's post or the article she quotes does not in any way dispute my

claim
that CPS cannot and does not run NCIC checks. Nor does CPS run these
NCIC
checks through law enforcement agencies.

CPS is not a law enforcement agency and therefore denied access to NCIC

by
the FBI.

Doug









  #5  
Old September 26th 04, 07:08 PM
Kane
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Doug" wrote in message ...
Kane writes:

Kane.....
I KNOW it is. That doesn't mean it's a full crim check and it sure as
hell isn't FBI interstate such as foster and adoptive applicants have
to have if they have lived outside their present state of residence in
the past five years....(varies from state to state I believe).

( I was referring to NCIC bg checks he denies are run on anyone below)

Doug......
"NCIC background checks are not run on ANY principal, client or foster
or guardian applicant. CPS in my jurisdiction is not allowed access
the the FBI's database (NCIC).

So, point out to him that post from a WA vendor, a "jackleg"
apparently. who claims:

"Background checks are multilayered and unnecessarily complex. As many
as four state and private agencies can be involved in one request. If
the applicant has lived out of state any time during the past three
years, fingerprints also are required. The Washington State Patrol
then conducts an FBI check. Now, we have five agencies involved."


Hi, Kane!


Hi, Doug. 0:-

Fern's post or the article she quotes does not in any way dispute my claim
that CPS cannot and does not run NCIC checks. Nor does CPS run these NCIC
checks through law enforcement agencies.


R R R ...sure Doug...and instead of doing something useful like
clarifying your self or asking ME to so that those seeking more
accurate and effective information in their fight against CPS you are
going to split hairs.

Yes, Doug you are right. I mispoke, using what amounts to or would in
verbal communication, a quick shorthand....when I said "CPS gets a
federal BG check on foster families that have lived out of state x
number of years."

CPS is not a law enforcement agency and therefore denied access to NCIC by
the FBI.


Yep...no direct access...and I didn't make that claim, only that they
get bg checks from NCIC, and that doesn't for a moment stop CPS from
requesting, and getting, as a perfectly routine thing, for YEARS NOW,
their local LEAs to submit the forms to NCIC.

Doug, there are posters here and that have come here that have had it
happen. Have you any possible excuse for being misleading like this,
other than possible ignorance, or an overwhelming desire to play
"discredit someone that giveS ACCURATE INFORMATION SO FAMILIES WON'T
FIND OUT THE TRUTH?"

You are developing a pattern here. And by now, two years of this, it's
becoming all too obvious you are up to something, and that something
the readers are getting closer figuring out in time. Stick around.
They NEED to know who and what you are.

Doug


Yeah, Douggie. Duplicitious, Dumb, and Wrong, all on the same topic.
You're a whiz. Now zip your pants.

CPS GETS the results of those bg checks and uses them. What is the
difference for all practical purposes of folks reading here, WHO
PROCESSES THEM FOR CPS?

They still come back from NCIC and the FBI.

http://www.casanet.org/program-manag...volunteers.htm
Notice, this is NOT a law enforcement agency.

"National criminal record database
There is no national database of criminal records which you can access
directly. Many state and local law enforcement agencies and courts
send criminal records to the FBI's National Crime Information Center
(NCIC). Only law enforcement personnel can access this information.
Many states will obtain information for you from these national record
searches. These searches can provide another added level of assurance,
especially when an individual has lived in more than one jurisdiction.
However, while the system is national in scope, it does not cover all
criminal convictions."

Look at this entry in the GEORGIA DIVISION OF FAMILY AND CHILDREN
SERVICES
SOCIAL SERVICES SUPERVISOR'S HANDBOOK:

http://dfcs.dhr.georgia.gov/vgn/imag...rshandbook.pdf

"Re-Evaluation of
the Foster Home
1015.17 The County Director must review/approve all reevaluations
of foster homes prior to the current
approval's expiration.
The supervisor must review and sign the re-evaluation
before it is submitted to the county director.
Good Practice: The supervisor should maintain a
tracking system to keep up with criminal records checks,
physical exams, etc. IDS should be checked monthly
regarding annual re-evaluation due dates. Supervisors
must ensure that any foster home used is in approval
status.
[[[[[[The county director must grant a waiver when
fingerprints have been submitted twice to GCIC and
NCIC for processing but have been rejected as
"unreadable." (Note: After the second rejection, the
home can be granted full approval status if all other
requirements have been met.)"]]]

Now Doug, if NCIC bgs weren't being done by CPS (though LEAs) then why
in hell would there be a directive on how to handle a poorly composed
one that's unreadable....and not even requiring director waiver until
the third bad one, eh?

Oh, and while I was compiling my research on this NCIC issue, I ran
across yet another one of these:

http://www.sao17.state.fl.us/grandjury.htm

"In addition, DCF expanded its staff of Protective Investigators and
of Family Services Counselors both here and in Dade and Palm Beach
Counties"

Yeah, Douggie there are no non-casecarrying dedicated specialist
investigators in CPS.0:-

And back to NCIC:

Here's Michigan's, doing exactly what I claim...getting an NCIC
through their local LEAs.

http://www.mfia.state.mi.us/olmweb/ex/cfa/732-50.pdf

Hell, they are even doing it trough computer terminals in their own
child welfare offices:

"LEIN Overview (LEIN Information Available)
Child welfare programs have access to information on the LEIN through
FIA-based LEIN terminals in local offices. This access is governed by
an FIA agreement with the Michigan State Police. This access to
Michigan
LEIN information includes the following:
• Criminal histories
• Sex offenders
• Missing/wanted persons
• Prison and parole information
• Gun registration/permits
• Personal Protection Orders (PPO)
• Officer cautions
• Michigan Secretary of State information
• National Crime Information Center (NCIC) – warrants only from
other states

"Requesting a LEIN Clearance
A criminal record check must be conducted through LEIN for every
adult household member in the prospective adoptive family. A criminal
record check may also be conducted for any minor household member
if there is reason to believe that this information is necessary to
make a
decision regarding the adoptive family's suitability as an adoptive
placement.
LEIN information must be obtained through the FIA LEIN terminal
in the local office."

Lemme show you how long this NCIC access by the state for checking
backgrounds of foster applicant's has been around...notice in the
draft of a bill of amendments the language being used.

http://www.le.state.ut.us/~1997/bill...r/HB0307S2.htm

" 62A-4a-413. Agencies and individuals providing services to children
-- Felony or misdemeanor conviction.
(1) (a) As of July 1, 1990, each public or private agency or
individual licensed by the
department to provide child care services, child placing services,
youth programs, substitute, foster,
or institutionalized care to children shall, in order to obtain or
renew a license under Section
62A-2-108, submit to the department the name and other identifying
information, which may include
fingerprints, of new and proposed:
(i) owners;
(ii) directors;
(iii) members of the governing body;
(iv) employees;
(v) providers of care; and
(vi) volunteers, except parents of children enrolled in the
programs.
(b) The Law Enforcement and Technical Services Division of the
Department of Public
Safety shall process that information to determine whether the
individual has been convicted of any
crime.
(c) As of July 1, 1997, persons described in Subsection (1)(a)
may also be subject to a

- 20 -
complete Federal Bureau of Investigation criminal background check
through the national criminal
history system (NCIC) if they provide out-of-home care for
children, in accordance with Section
78-3a-307.1. If an FBI fingerprint background check is required
pursuant to Section 78-3a-307.1,
the provider may be provisionally licensed."

Doug, I've been doing this for a very long time...I HAVE been wrong
before and corrected myself..that's how I learn. If your RIGHT I'd
admit it, thank you for giving me more accurate information, and value
it for what I used to do...supporting relatives.

It was they who first turned me on to the use of NCIC to get bg checks
on them. They got a copy of their processed and NCIC notated form
back...FROM CPS...via the FOIA...for the express purpose of asking my
advice on how to deal with an upcoming interview by a supervisor and
worker on the issue of them having a juvenile felony record for
assualt (yep, everyong things JR records for ever closed...NO THEY ARE
NOT...wanna nother argument me?) ..when they got into a bitch slapping
fight as a teen in the school cafeteria.

And I read OVER THE ENTIRE FORM FROM NCIC that you say doesn't exist,
and couched them on how to put the best face on how they had worked to
overcome this behavior and the resulting conviction..etc etc etc.

Now Doug, you can tell me I didn't, but that isn't going to change my
memory, or the card of thanks in my file cabinet about five feet
behind me. Nor the experience of the family.

And Doug, I WAS an employee of a child treatment agency with custody
of children who were wards of the state. I have personally filled OUT
the form for an NCIC bg check. I filled out one when I offered to do
some volunteer work for a state child welfare agency just a year ago.
I didn't follow through and actually DO any because the drive is too
damn long from here, but I got the fingerprints, submitted the NCIC
based form, and in about 10 days I got an ID badge on a little string
to put around my neck. Obviously I had a clean criminal background
check.

You amaze me with your obstinate hubris. Is it THAT important to you
to attack my credibility in ways this stupid? When information
refuting you, as I have provided so many times and yet again today, is
so easy to come by?

Here's yet another referance to foster parents and national criminal
background check:

http://www.gao.gov/archive/1997/gg97032.pdf

"For selected job positions, organizations, or local jurisdictions in
the five
study states, we found that national checks detected some applicants
with
criminal histories who may not have been detected by less
comprehensive
practices, including state background checks. Perhaps the most
dramatic
example occurred in 1996 in Tennessee, where four children were
removed from a foster care placement after a national check showed
that
the foster parent had a previous conviction in Alabama for enticing a
child
into his home for immoral purposes. Due to an absence of reporting
requirements, we were unable to obtain comprehensive statistics on the
use and results of national fingerprint background checks in the five
states
we studied."

and;

"• Fingerprint searches of prospective foster parents in Tennessee
during the
period October 1995 through May 1996 showed that 120 (or 9.3 percent)
of
1,293 applicants had criminal felony records. Of the 120 criminal
history
records, 58 involved out-of-state records, which were not identifiable
based solely upon a search of Tennessee records.
• In Texas, a local nonprofit youth-serving organization requested a
total of
98 national fingerprint-based checks from August 1, 1995, through July
17,
1996. One applicant was rejected as a volunteer, in part, because the
criminal history records showed a drug possession conviction."

and from nearly 10 years ago;

"Under a Tennessee law, which took effect in January 1994 (see app.
II),
child welfare agencies can require state and national
fingerprint-based
background checks on all persons applying to work with children. In
October 1995, the Tennessee Department of Human Services started
requiring such checks on prospective foster care parents and social
services employees who will be working with children.

From October 1995 through May 1996, the Tennessee Department of
Human Services requested 1,293 state and FBI fingerprint checks for
foster
care applicants and social services employees."

and;

"Further, 535,941 (or
47 percent) of the total requests for criminal history searches were
accompanied by fingerprint cards, which the Department [Florida
Department of Law Enforcement] forwarded to the
FBI for national checks.3"

....which is in reference to:

"One exception is the Florida
Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, which is responsible
for
licensing and certifying facilities for the care of children. During
1995, this
department requested over 100,000 national background checks."

So tell us again how CPS can't and doesn't obtain national criminal
background checks from the FBI.

Doug, I once had heat from a state CPS agency when I had mentioned to
a relative foster applicant that their certification might be being
held up by, "the FBI criminal background check" because I knew they
had lived out of state in the pats five years (statute based
limitations in that state REQUIRING AN FBI NCIC CHECK) and the lady, a
most assertive lady, called the local FBI office and requested they
speed up her bg check. R R R RR ..

The CPS regional manager that chatted with me about...remonstrated
actually and asked me NOT to sick my families on the FBI...was
cackling the whole time.

Doug, I know I'm exaggerting when I say this, but it's from my heart
so I'll indulge myself....you KNOW DAMN NEAR NOTHING ABOUT CPS FIELD
PRACTICE AND YOU FOIST YOUR LIMITED AND MISLEADING GARBAGE ON THIS NG
AS THOUGH YOU ARE SOME KIND OF SAVIOUR OF FAMILIES.

You are more likely a recruiter for one or more of the anti CPS looney
organizations. Looking for clients and membership enrollments. Am I
right?

Ferns a ****in' pimp and you, taking advantage of vulnerabilities,
just shanghai people into joining up..when they would be better
served getting real help.

How close to right am I here? When are you going to admit what you are
actually doing in this ng? Hell, the attorney trolling here for
"falsely" accused dad clients is more honest than you.

I believe one of the claims I've made regarding people such as you on
this ng is that of being "phonies." I'd say I'm coming closer to the
mark in proving that all the time...wouldn't you?

Have a nice day, sir!

Kane
  #6  
Old September 29th 04, 02:35 AM
Doug
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Ron writes:

They do DOJ checks here in Neb., as well as Registry checks and
fingerprints. I'd assume that they run those through the NCIC Fingerprint
database. CPS can get its own connection to the NCIC system for little

cost
since it is a state agency and has a reason to have it.


Hi, Ron!

CPS does criminal background checks in my jurisdiction as well as every
other state that I know of. However, NONE of these CPS agencies do NCIC
checks. As any worker can tell you, CPS is not a law enforcement agency and
therefore does not have access to NCIC.

Indiana recently passed a reform law requiring CPS to run NCIC background
checks on guardians and the FBI publicly denied access. This was simply an
announcement of a long standing FBI policy. Any reader can contact an FBI
spokesperson to varify.

-----------------
Bureau says state agency cannot use its database to conduct background
checks on family guardians.

By Eunice Trotter

June 26, 2004

The FBI has denied Indiana Child Protection Services access to its
criminal records database, thwarting caseworkers' ability to conduct
national background checks on relatives who want to provide a home for
abuse or neglected children.

The background checks were to begin July 1, when a new law, House
Enrolled Act 1194, is scheduled to go into effect. The law requires an
FBI criminal background check of everyone in a relative's home.

FBI officials formally notified the state this week that Child
Protection Services, or CPS, is not a criminal justice agency and
therefore is not eligible to access criminal records in the Department
of Justice database.

The law puts family members who seek to take in children under more
scrutiny than foster parents.

"If the FBI won't let us have access to the information, then we can't
get it," said state Rep. Dennis Avery, D-Evansville, author of the
law.

Local judges also have said CPS could not have access to juvenile
criminal records for the purpose of doing background checks, said
Avery.

As officials worked to digest the FBI decision, another blow to the
new law came Friday when the Indiana Civil Liberties Union, acting on
behalf of a child in foster care, filed a legal action to have the
child placed with relatives.

ICLU legal director Ken Falk said a motion was left Friday at Marion
County juvenile court, asking a judge to overturn a CPS decision to
place a child in foster care rather than with a relative. The
petitioner in the confidential filing is a court-appointed
representative for the unnamed child.

Falk said the organization wants the legal action to be decided on
behalf of all Indiana children who might be placed in foster care
instead of with suitable relatives.

"What this law would do, in effect, is make it much easier to place a
child with a stranger than with a relative," said Falk, adding that
only local background checks are performed on foster parents.

"Every single person in the system recognizes there are problems with
this law that have to be solved, but they won't be solved by next
Thursday," Falk said.

Marion County juvenile court Judge James W. Payne, who was unavailable
for comment, has been a critic of the FBI background check provision.
He foresaw a bottleneck of children waiting in foster care and a
threat to the state's federal funding. Millions of dollars could be
lost if the state violates federal rules that prohibit state wards
from being in multiple placements.

Annette Biesecker, a lawyer for the Indiana Family and Social Services
Administration, the state agency over CPS, said caseworkers will
continue to perform local background checks, including reviews of the
state's child abuse and neglect database.

She said the administration and other officials will continue to
propose changes in the law to help protect children by keeping them
out of the homes of unsuitable relatives.

"We agree it was a good bill, but it presents certain challenges that
under current law we cannot perform," she said. "We can't make the FBI
give us the information."

Legislators and FSSA officials said they had thought accessing basic
FBI records through the Indiana State Police would have been
relatively simple, though at a cost of $39 per check.

But this method would have taken two or three months to complete for
each person in a household being investigated, and the information
would not have been adequate to determine whether a relative had been
convicted of one of 19 crimes included in the new law.

State Rep. David Orentlicher, D-Indianapolis, co-author of the law and
a member of the Governor's Commission on Abused and Neglected Children
and Their Families, said legislators will make changes to the law
during the coming session.

It is likely the revised law will require more thorough local checks,
which in some cases were not performed at all in the past, he said.

Cathleen Graham, who heads a statewide foster care association, said
her organization supports the intent of the legislation to better
protect children who are being placed with family members.

She said the new law likely will cause children to be moved to several
foster homes.

"It is not a good thing for children to be repeatedly moved from place
to place," Graham said.

Sharon Pierce, executive director of The Villages, the state's largest
foster care agency, said changes to the bill are welcomed.

"I think then it could be a really positive tool to make sure
children's connections with families are not hurt."
http://www.indystar.com/articles/7/158035-9047-009.html


  #7  
Old September 29th 04, 08:24 AM
Kane
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 21:35:45 -0400, "Doug" wrote:

.............something stinks in Indiana and or the reporters
article.....

Well, Doug really didn't say that. He should, of course. But instead
he's going to compound the error of misinformatino, caused by we
cannot know what.

Why he insists on doing this...focusing on ONE piece of information
that backs his claim, but ignores the many citations of state AND
FEDERAL SOURCES that disprove his claim I do not know.

I suspect we have seen a lot of this very kind of denial and arrogance
from him over the years.

Let's see if he carries this forward to a further embarrassment of
misinformation and ignorance....it's not as though I didn't already
give him plenty of information to show that CPS offices in state after
state do in fact have access to NCIC data...regardless of how they get
it...that is the crux, and it's used to assess foster parenting
applicants, as adoptive applicants, family and non family.

Yet he persists in his hubris....shaking head sadly

Ron writes:

They do DOJ checks here in Neb., as well as Registry checks and
fingerprints. I'd assume that they run those through the NCIC

Fingerprint
database. CPS can get its own connection to the NCIC system for

little
cost
since it is a state agency and has a reason to have it.


Hi, Ron!

CPS does criminal background checks in my jurisdiction as well as

every
other state that I know of. However, NONE of these CPS agencies do

NCIC
checks. As any worker can tell you, CPS is not a law enforcement

agency and
therefore does not have access to NCIC.

Indiana recently passed a reform law requiring CPS to run NCIC

background
checks on guardians and the FBI publicly denied access. This was

simply an
announcement of a long standing FBI policy. Any reader can contact

an FBI
spokesperson to varify.

-----------------
Bureau says state agency cannot use its database to conduct

background
checks on family guardians.


I believe you and the reporter are badly mistaken. And I believe that
it is a case of misinformation possibly given by a low level clerk in
an FBI office.

Or simply a misunderstanding.

A request for DIRECT access, as in a WAN connection, or Internet
accessed connection, is likely what is being denied, and everyone in
that state appears to be, at least connected to this story, ignorant
of the simple solution done by all other states that wish this
information.....simply submit it to local LE and have THEM do the bg
check.

That IS what other states have done, and it's what I have proven by
citation after citation in earlie posts on this subject.

http://www.ncacdss.org/ncacdss/Legis...AN11-11-03.htm

"We do not need to have to do county by county criminal checks---we
need to be able to access the National Criminal Investigation Center
(NCIC) so that we know immediately the criminal history of all
individuals with whom our children are placed and with whom our Social
Workers are dealing. We do not need children being placed at risk
because we can not get information and we do not want children to be
placed unnecessarily in Foster Homes because we can not check out
placements in timely manner. We do not need for there to ever by any
more Jose Rosado's out there. We never have to place children in
harm's way because we can not get access to criminal information that
is public information."

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache...ecks.+&hl=e n

"Qualifications

Prospective Foster should meet the following qualifications

* Passing an extensive criminal background check (NCIC)."

http://www.mfia.state.mi.us/olmweb/ex/cfa/732-50.pdf

"ADOPTION - ADOPTIVE FAMILY ASSESSMENT
ADOPTION SERVICES MANUAL STATE OF MICHIGAN
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY
CFB 2003-002
2-1-2003
A verification must be conducted through DCIS, BRS, Child Welfare
Licensing of the current or former status as a foster home licensee.
Form BFS-1326, Licensing Record Clearance Request, may be used
for this purpose. Information received will also include LEIN
information,
but only criminal conviction records. See LEIN Document Disposal, for
retention of LEIN criminal history record information documents
received from DCIS, BFS, Child Welfare Licensing."

The above to establish this is an adoptive family bg check
requirement....and below, the access LEIN obtains:

"LEIN Overview (LEIN Information Available)
Child welfare programs have access to information on the LEIN through
FIA-based LEIN terminals in local offices. This access is governed by
an FIA agreement with the Michigan State Police. This access to
Michigan
LEIN information includes the following:
• Criminal histories
• Sex offenders
• Missing/wanted persons
• Prison and parole information
• Gun registration/permits
• Personal Protection Orders (PPO)
• Officer cautions
• Michigan Secretary of State information
• National Crime Information Center (NCIC) – warrants only from
other states
Note: Information not available to FIA is Canadian criminal history
information and criminal convictions from other states. This
information
is restricted to "criminal justice agencies."
Requesting a LEIN Clearance
A criminal record check must be conducted through LEIN for every
adult household member in the prospective adoptive family. A criminal
record check may also be conducted for any minor household member
if there is reason to believe that this information is necessary to
make a
decision regarding the adoptive family's suitability as an adoptive
placement.
LEIN information must be obtained through the FIA LEIN terminal
in the local office.
Form FIA-269, "Criminal History Information Request," must be used to
request LEIN clearances. The subject of any LEIN clearance must be
CFA 732-50 4 of 14 ADOPTION - ADOPTIVE FAMILY ASSESSMENT
ADOPTION SERVICES MANUAL STATE OF MICHIGAN
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY
CFB 2003-002
2-1-2003
documented in the adoptive family assessment indicating the person's
role or relationship within the family. Form FIA-269, "Criminal
History
Information Request", must be filed with the adoptive family
assessment."

Indiana has been misinformed about access to NCIC.

In fact if you read the rest of the referenced document above you'll
find extensive information on how LEIN is used, and how the
information retrieved..as it says, from NCIC is to be destroyed after
use for making the adoptive family assessment.

Most states have guidelines that state that applicants who have lived
out of state within x numbers of years will be submitted to an NCIC
check..and the wording of the entry from the document above makes
clear why NCIC is used....it is the only source for this:

"• National Crime Information Center (NCIC) – warrants only from
other states"

You are wrong, and the reporter is wrong. One of you is misinformed,
the other a liar.

http://www.dss.mo.gov/cd/info/memos/2004/79/cd0479.pdf

"POLICY IMPACT 5.4.1 210.482.1-5 Emergency Placement Background Checks

Details emergency placement procedures of a child in a private home
due to unexpected absence of the child's parents. • Juvenile court and
CD may request local or state law enforcement to conduct name-based
criminal history record check, including full orders of protection and
outstanding warrants of each person over the age of 17 residing in the
home by using MULES and NCIC to access FBI information."

[ Note: CD stands for Children's Division in MO ]


http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache...ecks.+ &hl=en

"Page 13
LEADS UPDATE
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) – in conjunction with the
National Crime Information Center (NCIC), the Ohio Bureau of Criminal
Identification and Investigation (BCII) and the Ohio Highway Patrol,
have all given the "green light" to Ohio's PCSA's to access LEADS –
The Law Enforcement Automated Database System. This access will
only be for cases where out-of-home placements are inevitable and an
immediate background screen is warranted on those members who are in
the receiving home.

Thus, access will be restricted to these types of "exigent
circumstances" only, and unauthorized use of LEADS can and will result
in criminal prosecution. There is a myriad of restrictions placed upon
access to LEADS information. Currently, there is a sub-committee of
PCSAO Legislative Committee Members looking at all of the
parameters of access for rural, small, medium, large and metro
counties. Preliminary discussion reveals that the feasibility of
implementation at the small to medium-sized county levels is a
definite reality, based clearly on logistics and number of families
served. However, LEADS access and usage at the large to metro county
level is much more challenging, and in many respects, logistically
complex and potentially cost prohibitive. A decision as to whether
MCCS will implement a LEADS protocol in this county will be
forthcoming in the next few months. (Once all of the data and
implementation strategies have been thoroughly reviewed as to their
operational value).
13
"
I presume you know what a "receiving home" is, Doug. Or should I
explain it to you? And notice, none of this is about FBI refusal to
allow access, but only to the costs that are prohibitive. Like some
states they most likely want to set up an inhouse access system.

I have a hunch how they can overcome the "law enforcement agency"
requirement problem, if it actually exists.

I know a number of ex police officers, some retired, that work for CPS
as caseworkers and supervisors. It would be a simple thing to have
them sworn in again as LEOs.

And finally, Doug. Do you remember when we were discussing the issue
of the federal assessment or evaluations (crudely referred to as an
Audit) of the states? 0:-

Have a gander at Mississippi's "Strength":

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/c.../ms/foster.htm

From the entry:

"Mississippi is in substantial conformity with the systemic factor
pertaining to Foster and Adoptive Parent Licensing, Recruitment and
Retention.

........[ jumping to ]......

Item 43.

The State complies with Federal requirements for criminal background
clearances as related to licensing or approving foster care and
adoptive placements and has in place a case planning process that
includes provisions for addressing the safety of foster care and
adoptive placements for children.

__X__ Strength _____ Area Needing Improvement

This item is rated as a Strength because the State complies with
Federal requirements for criminal background clearances as related to
licensing or approving foster care and adoptive placements.

According to the Statewide Assessment, Mississippi requires a criminal
background check from a local law enforcement agency prior to placing
a child in a home, even a relative home in an emergency situation.
During the licensing or approval process, criminal background checks
are obtained from the foster and adoptive applicant's local police and
sheriff's departments. Background checks are also obtained from the
National Criminal Information Center (NCIC). Documentation of the
background checks is obtained on all foster and adoptive parents
before approval. The licensure unit and the Division of Monitoring
verify this documentation.

Stakeholders commenting on this issue during the onsite CFSR were in
general agreement that criminal background checks are conducted for
all adults age 18 and older in licensed foster homes and for relative
caregivers. Stakeholders noted that the agency conducts central
registry and background checks with county law enforcement for
relative and non-relative homes. However, stakeholders expressed
concern that the agency relies too heavily on local and county sources
and does not conduct more extensive searches using statewide or FBI
databases."

So tell us again that states cannot access FBI databases?

You never learn do you, Doug.

I admire your persistance while I laugh at your presumptive arrogance

Have you any idea how you are starting to look to the readers here?

They can read, Doug. They see what I post. They KNOW you are
weaseling. Lately there is very little you have posted in opposition
that hasn't been just this sort of nonsense.

Just how far will you go before you admit you have screwed up badly?

Kane

By Eunice Trotter

June 26, 2004

The FBI has denied Indiana Child Protection Services access to its
criminal records database, thwarting caseworkers' ability to conduct
national background checks on relatives who want to provide a home

for
abuse or neglected children.

The background checks were to begin July 1, when a new law, House
Enrolled Act 1194, is scheduled to go into effect. The law requires

an
FBI criminal background check of everyone in a relative's home.

FBI officials formally notified the state this week that Child
Protection Services, or CPS, is not a criminal justice agency and
therefore is not eligible to access criminal records in the

Department
of Justice database.

The law puts family members who seek to take in children under more
scrutiny than foster parents.

"If the FBI won't let us have access to the information, then we

can't
get it," said state Rep. Dennis Avery, D-Evansville, author of the
law.

Local judges also have said CPS could not have access to juvenile
criminal records for the purpose of doing background checks, said
Avery.

As officials worked to digest the FBI decision, another blow to the
new law came Friday when the Indiana Civil Liberties Union, acting on
behalf of a child in foster care, filed a legal action to have the
child placed with relatives.

ICLU legal director Ken Falk said a motion was left Friday at Marion
County juvenile court, asking a judge to overturn a CPS decision to
place a child in foster care rather than with a relative. The
petitioner in the confidential filing is a court-appointed
representative for the unnamed child.

Falk said the organization wants the legal action to be decided on
behalf of all Indiana children who might be placed in foster care
instead of with suitable relatives.

"What this law would do, in effect, is make it much easier to place a
child with a stranger than with a relative," said Falk, adding that
only local background checks are performed on foster parents.

"Every single person in the system recognizes there are problems with
this law that have to be solved, but they won't be solved by next
Thursday," Falk said.

Marion County juvenile court Judge James W. Payne, who was

unavailable
for comment, has been a critic of the FBI background check provision.
He foresaw a bottleneck of children waiting in foster care and a
threat to the state's federal funding. Millions of dollars could be
lost if the state violates federal rules that prohibit state wards
from being in multiple placements.

Annette Biesecker, a lawyer for the Indiana Family and Social

Services
Administration, the state agency over CPS, said caseworkers will
continue to perform local background checks, including reviews of the
state's child abuse and neglect database.

She said the administration and other officials will continue to
propose changes in the law to help protect children by keeping them
out of the homes of unsuitable relatives.

"We agree it was a good bill, but it presents certain challenges that
under current law we cannot perform," she said. "We can't make the

FBI
give us the information."

Legislators and FSSA officials said they had thought accessing basic
FBI records through the Indiana State Police would have been
relatively simple, though at a cost of $39 per check.

But this method would have taken two or three months to complete for
each person in a household being investigated, and the information
would not have been adequate to determine whether a relative had been
convicted of one of 19 crimes included in the new law.

State Rep. David Orentlicher, D-Indianapolis, co-author of the law

and
a member of the Governor's Commission on Abused and Neglected

Children
and Their Families, said legislators will make changes to the law
during the coming session.

It is likely the revised law will require more thorough local checks,
which in some cases were not performed at all in the past, he said.

Cathleen Graham, who heads a statewide foster care association, said
her organization supports the intent of the legislation to better
protect children who are being placed with family members.

She said the new law likely will cause children to be moved to

several
foster homes.

"It is not a good thing for children to be repeatedly moved from

place
to place," Graham said.

Sharon Pierce, executive director of The Villages, the state's

largest
foster care agency, said changes to the bill are welcomed.

"I think then it could be a really positive tool to make sure
children's connections with families are not hurt."
http://www.indystar.com/articles/7/158035-9047-009.html

  #8  
Old September 29th 04, 05:42 PM
Ron
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Doug" wrote in message
...
Ron writes:

They do DOJ checks here in Neb., as well as Registry checks and
fingerprints. I'd assume that they run those through the NCIC

Fingerprint
database. CPS can get its own connection to the NCIC system for little

cost
since it is a state agency and has a reason to have it.


Hi, Ron!

CPS does criminal background checks in my jurisdiction as well as every
other state that I know of. However, NONE of these CPS agencies do NCIC
checks. As any worker can tell you, CPS is not a law enforcement agency

and
therefore does not have access to NCIC.


Well Doug, being a law enforcement agency is not a requirement for having
access to the NCIC database, I had one when I was in the military (not a
personal one, but one in my office). Additionally, CPS as a government
agency, can contract with any of the state agencies that have current access
(i.e. State Patrol) to conduct NCIC checks. I don't know for a fact that
this is what they do, but a fingerprint check kind of indicate to me that
this is a small part of their total required background checks.

In any case, NCIC is primarily for checking to see if an individual has
warrants out for them or if a car or other property is stolen, and missing
persons. And as you so often point out, one is innocent until proven guilty
in a court of law. Having a warrant out on you for something is not enough
to preclude one from becoming a foster parent.

Indiana recently passed a reform law requiring CPS to run NCIC background
checks on guardians and the FBI publicly denied access. This was simply

an
announcement of a long standing FBI policy. Any reader can contact an FBI
spokesperson to varify.


"NCIC is a computerized index of criminal justice information (i.e.-
criminal record history information, fugitives, stolen properties, missing
persons). It is available to Federal, state, and local law enforcement and
other criminal justice agencies and is operational 24 hours a day, 365 days
a year.

PURPOSE: The purpose for maintaining the NCIC system is to provide a
computerized database for ready access by a criminal justice agency making
an inquiry and for prompt disclosure of information in the system from other
criminal justice agencies about crimes and criminals. This information
assists authorized agencies in criminal justice and related law enforcement
objectives, such as apprehending fugitives, locating missing persons,
locating and returning stolen property, as well as in the protection of the
law enforcement officers encountering the individuals described in the
system.

ACCESS CONSTRAINTS: All records in NCIC are protected from unauthorized
access through appropriate administrative, physical, and technical
safeguards. These safeguards include restricting access to those with a need
to know to perform their official duties, and using locks, alarm devices,
passwords, and/or encrypting data communications.

USE CONSTRAINTS: Users of the NCIC system will be restricted to only those
privileges necessary to perform an authorized task(s)."

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/fbi/is/ncic.htm

All of this information is available from other sources, but use of the NCIC
database is far simpler than running around to all the different places to
get it all. All one needs is an official reason to access the data, and the
ability to make the connection. That the FBI refused one state's CPS agency
request for access may not be sufficient, they will eventually be required
to provide that access, but at a restricted level (as outlined in the
passages above) so that each state's CPS offices can do their job better.

What is the concern with this? Afraid that they will find out more easily
about bio-parents than their current methods? I was under the impression
that you wanted to make CPS more efficient Doug, what made you change your
mind?

Ron


-----------------
Bureau says state agency cannot use its database to conduct background
checks on family guardians.

By Eunice Trotter

June 26, 2004

The FBI has denied Indiana Child Protection Services access to its
criminal records database, thwarting caseworkers' ability to conduct
national background checks on relatives who want to provide a home for
abuse or neglected children.

The background checks were to begin July 1, when a new law, House
Enrolled Act 1194, is scheduled to go into effect. The law requires an
FBI criminal background check of everyone in a relative's home.

FBI officials formally notified the state this week that Child
Protection Services, or CPS, is not a criminal justice agency and
therefore is not eligible to access criminal records in the Department
of Justice database.

The law puts family members who seek to take in children under more
scrutiny than foster parents.

"If the FBI won't let us have access to the information, then we can't
get it," said state Rep. Dennis Avery, D-Evansville, author of the
law.

Local judges also have said CPS could not have access to juvenile
criminal records for the purpose of doing background checks, said
Avery.

As officials worked to digest the FBI decision, another blow to the
new law came Friday when the Indiana Civil Liberties Union, acting on
behalf of a child in foster care, filed a legal action to have the
child placed with relatives.

ICLU legal director Ken Falk said a motion was left Friday at Marion
County juvenile court, asking a judge to overturn a CPS decision to
place a child in foster care rather than with a relative. The
petitioner in the confidential filing is a court-appointed
representative for the unnamed child.

Falk said the organization wants the legal action to be decided on
behalf of all Indiana children who might be placed in foster care
instead of with suitable relatives.

"What this law would do, in effect, is make it much easier to place a
child with a stranger than with a relative," said Falk, adding that
only local background checks are performed on foster parents.

"Every single person in the system recognizes there are problems with
this law that have to be solved, but they won't be solved by next
Thursday," Falk said.

Marion County juvenile court Judge James W. Payne, who was unavailable
for comment, has been a critic of the FBI background check provision.
He foresaw a bottleneck of children waiting in foster care and a
threat to the state's federal funding. Millions of dollars could be
lost if the state violates federal rules that prohibit state wards
from being in multiple placements.

Annette Biesecker, a lawyer for the Indiana Family and Social Services
Administration, the state agency over CPS, said caseworkers will
continue to perform local background checks, including reviews of the
state's child abuse and neglect database.

She said the administration and other officials will continue to
propose changes in the law to help protect children by keeping them
out of the homes of unsuitable relatives.

"We agree it was a good bill, but it presents certain challenges that
under current law we cannot perform," she said. "We can't make the FBI
give us the information."

Legislators and FSSA officials said they had thought accessing basic
FBI records through the Indiana State Police would have been
relatively simple, though at a cost of $39 per check.

But this method would have taken two or three months to complete for
each person in a household being investigated, and the information
would not have been adequate to determine whether a relative had been
convicted of one of 19 crimes included in the new law.

State Rep. David Orentlicher, D-Indianapolis, co-author of the law and
a member of the Governor's Commission on Abused and Neglected Children
and Their Families, said legislators will make changes to the law
during the coming session.

It is likely the revised law will require more thorough local checks,
which in some cases were not performed at all in the past, he said.

Cathleen Graham, who heads a statewide foster care association, said
her organization supports the intent of the legislation to better
protect children who are being placed with family members.

She said the new law likely will cause children to be moved to several
foster homes.

"It is not a good thing for children to be repeatedly moved from place
to place," Graham said.

Sharon Pierce, executive director of The Villages, the state's largest
foster care agency, said changes to the bill are welcomed.

"I think then it could be a really positive tool to make sure
children's connections with families are not hurt."
http://www.indystar.com/articles/7/158035-9047-009.html




  #9  
Old September 29th 04, 06:05 PM
Joe Jones
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Ron" wrote in message
news:SCB6d.18127$3n.11349@okepread06...

Having a warrant out on you for something is not enough
to preclude one from becoming a foster parent.


Does the US have an extradition treaty with fosterland?



  #10  
Old September 29th 04, 06:22 PM
Sherman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"WitchWirsen" wrote in message
news:bFq5d.119043$D%.4421@attbi_s51...
NCIC?
I signed a permission to do a background check with the FBI when I apped

to
foster.
If NCIC is a background check with the FBI then DFS most certainly DOES do
them.


States do vary in the extent of the criminal background checks that are done
on the potential foster parents. They do require that one signs permission
for them to perform a check. In the alternative, some agencies require the
candidate to provide a certified copy for them. Some agencies only check in
the State one lives in, depending upon the length of time of their
residency. Of course, they check with the sexual offender registry as well.
Most agencies also require a DMV record check.

These are usually done through the State law enforcement agencies, where
they go to get their information would depend upon factors that is
individual to each DHS agency.

Sherman.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
| ACS NY "Child welfare agencies get bad press" Kane Foster Parents 17 June 7th 04 03:47 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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.